HEAD TO HEAD · SCORED SEPTEMBER 2026 · CROWDSTRIKE EASM ADDED 13 OCTOBER 2026
Cortex Xpanse vs Microsoft Defender EASM: attack surface management compared
Quick answer
Cortex Xpanse scores 6.80 to Microsoft Defender EASM's 6.00 on our weights, a gap of 0.80. Cortex Xpanse leads on discovery, exploitability validation, remediation and integrations; Microsoft Defender EASM leads on time to value and pricing transparency. They tie on attribution.
Scored September 2026 · CrowdStrike EASM added 13 October 2026 · Drawn from vendor product pages, docs and public pricing
How do Cortex Xpanse and Microsoft Defender EASM compare on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | Cortex Xpanse | Microsoft Defender EASM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery of unknown assets and subsidiaries | 20% | 8 | 7 | Cortex Xpanse |
| Attribution accuracy and false-positive handling | 15% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
| Exploitability validation | 15% | 5 | 3 | Cortex Xpanse |
| Remediation and mitigation support | 20% | 8 | 4 | Cortex Xpanse |
| Integrations and platform reach | 10% | 9 | 8 | Cortex Xpanse |
| Time to value | 10% | 7 | 8 | Microsoft Defender EASM |
| Pricing transparency | 10% | 2 | 7 | Microsoft Defender EASM |
Cortex Xpanse leads on 4 criteria, Microsoft Defender EASM on 2, 1 tied. Weighted: Cortex Xpanse 6.80, Microsoft Defender EASM 6.00.
What does a finding arrive with in each?
Cortex Xpanse
- Owner or subsidiary attributedPartial
- Exploitability provenNot documented
- Ticket or workflow createdDocumented
- Compensating control appliedDocumented
- Fix retestedNot documented
Microsoft Defender EASM
- Owner or subsidiary attributedPartial
- Exploitability provenNot documented
- Ticket or workflow createdPartial
- Compensating control appliedNot documented
- Fix retestedNot documented
Where does each one win?
Cortex Xpanse wins on
Discovery of unknown assets and subsidiaries: 8 vs 7
Palo Alto Networks says Xpanse scans the full IPv4 space several times a day (4.3 billion addresses; 500 billion+ ports scanned daily).
Exploitability validation: 5 vs 3
Exploitability validation is not described on the product pages reviewed; the emphasis is discovery and response.
Remediation and mitigation support: 8 vs 4
Active Response runs built-in automated playbooks, with routing and remediation through Cortex XSOAR playbooks.
Integrations and platform reach: 9 vs 8
Native ties to Cortex XSOAR and Prisma Cloud inside the Palo Alto Networks Cortex portfolio.
Microsoft Defender EASM wins on
Time to value: 8 vs 7
30-day free trial on the first resource, plus the prebuilt inventory.
Pricing transparency: 7 vs 2
Self-serve Azure billing against a published definition of billable assets (approved hosts, domains and IP addresses) after the trial.
Tied: Attribution accuracy and false-positive handling (7).
How do Cortex Xpanse and Microsoft Defender EASM price?
| Item | Cortex Xpanse | Microsoft Defender EASM |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Not published. Contact sales. | Billed through Azure on billable assets (approved host:IP combinations, domains and IP addresses) after a 30-day free trial. See Microsoft's pricing page for the current rate. |
| Deployment | SaaS within the Palo Alto Networks Cortex portfolio | Azure resource (SaaS) |
| Pricing transparency score | 2 | 7 |
Prices and pricing bases as published by each vendor and reviewed in September 2026. 'Not published' means we did not find it on the vendor's public pages.
Should you choose Cortex Xpanse or Microsoft Defender EASM?
Choose Cortex Xpanse if
- The tool has to fit a wider security platform or many existing tools. Cortex Xpanse scores 9 on integrations: Native ties to Cortex XSOAR and Prisma Cloud inside the Palo Alto Networks Cortex portfolio.
- You want help closing exposures, not only a longer list of them. Cortex Xpanse scores 8 on remediation: Active Response runs built-in automated playbooks, with routing and remediation through Cortex XSOAR playbooks.
Choose Microsoft Defender EASM if
- You want results with the least setup. Microsoft Defender EASM scores 8 on time to value: 30-day free trial on the first resource, plus the prebuilt inventory.
- The tool has to fit a wider security platform or many existing tools. Microsoft Defender EASM scores 8 on integrations: Data connectors to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer and a Security Copilot integration in preview; no cross-tenant resource access.
On our default weights Cortex Xpanse comes out ahead. Change the weights in the score calculator to see whether that holds for your priorities.
Frequently asked questions
Is Cortex Xpanse better than Microsoft Defender EASM?
On our weights Cortex Xpanse scores higher, 6.80 to 6.00. Cortex Xpanse leads on 4 criteria and Microsoft Defender EASM on 2 criteria, with 1 tied. The better choice depends on which criteria matter most to you; the score calculator lets you change the weights.
What do Cortex Xpanse and Microsoft Defender EASM cost?
Cortex Xpanse: Not published. Contact sales. Microsoft Defender EASM: Billed through Azure on billable assets (approved host:IP combinations, domains and IP addresses) after a 30-day free trial. See Microsoft's pricing page for the current rate.
Which one does more to help fix exposures?
Cortex Xpanse scores 8 on remediation and mitigation support against 4 for Microsoft Defender EASM. Cortex Xpanse: Active Response runs built-in automated playbooks, with routing and remediation through Cortex XSOAR playbooks.
Sources: Cortex Xpanse, Attack surface management, Exposure management, Overview, What is discovery, Billable assets, Data connections, Pricing · Reviewed September 2026