Attack surface management · November 2026 Edition
Attaxion vs Cortex Xpanse
Zero of fourteen models named Attaxion first on the direct prompt; zero named Cortex Xpanse. Attaxion was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Cortex Xpanse by twelve and Attaxion carries 20 labels and Cortex Xpanse 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share19%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate5%45%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#7A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels2031A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Attaxion reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management was named alongside these two in ten of the fourteen direct answers. Intruder vs Attaxion · Intruder vs Cortex Xpanse · Attaxion vs CyCognito
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the attack surface management page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
AttaxionFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCortex Xpanse
Direct005 against Cortex Xpanse
Paraphrase113 against Cortex Xpanse
Comparative06
Budget-constrained901 against Cortex Xpanse
Scale-constrained012 against Cortex Xpanse
Negative001 against Attaxion · 3 against Cortex Xpanse
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Attaxion and Cortex Xpanse were named in the same answer twenty-four times, of the 61 answers naming Attaxion and the 119 naming Cortex Xpanse. In those answers Cortex Xpanse took the first choice one time and Attaxion six.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Attaxion and Cortex Xpanse stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | ||||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | ||||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | | |
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | | |||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | |
Attaxion Cortex Xpanse first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Attaxion on the left and Cortex Xpanse on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Attaxion and Cortex Xpanse stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
1 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.MiniMax M2.5Intruder alternatives: Attaxion, Halo Security
Neither was named
13 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Intruder alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Surface, CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Tenable Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
GPT-5.4 miniCensys ASM alternatives: IONIX, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Gemini 3.5 FlashCyCognito alternatives: Censys ASM, Detectify, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
Perplexity SonarIntruder alternatives: Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
Grok 4.20Intruder alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Exposure Management, CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Mistral SmallCyCognito, Intruder alternatives: Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
DeepSeek V4 FlashUpGuard BreachSight alternatives: CyCognito, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashTenable Vulnerability Management alternatives: Censys ASM, Dive, Rapid7
Kimi K2Intruder alternatives: CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, SynScan
GLM 4.7 FlashXIntruder alternatives: CyCognito, SecurityScorecard
GPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management alternatives: Censys ASM, CyCognito
Muse Glimmer 30BIntruder alternatives: CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Attaxion leads by nineteen points.
Attaxion19%#2 of 14Cortex Xpanse0%#14 of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
Attaxion leads by fifteen points.
Attaxion19%#2 of 12Cortex Xpanse4%#7 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: Cortex Xpanse leads at enterprise.
Cortex Xpanse44%#1 of 10Attaxion0%#– of 10What the models said about Attaxion
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“Some newer tools (like Attaxion) lack integrations with ticketing systems and messaging platforms” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“For a small monthly budget ($100-350), Attaxion offers the best value with automated vulnerability scanning and continuous monitoring” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Best Overall Value: Attaxion ... frequently cited as the best balance of price and performance for SMBs and startups.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Attaxion Starter at $129/mo for up to 40 assets is widely cited as the most affordable full EASM offering” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
What the models said about Cortex Xpanse
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“What to Avoid ... Enterprise-focused; ~$95,000/year starting price” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise tools like Palo Alto Cortex Xpanse, Censys, and Mandiant ASM are powerful but often assume six-figure budgets” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · soft negative
“General high-cost or complex platforms (e.g., Cortex Xpanse, Mandiant ASM, CrowdStrike Falcon Exposure Management)” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Strong in automated discovery, risk prioritization, and response. Excellent for broad internet-facing assets and integrations.” Grok 4.20 · scale prompt · first choice
“A leading Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) tool, recognized as a Leader in Forrester's 2024 ASM Wave.” Mistral Small · comparative prompt · first choice
“Cortex Xpanse represents the enterprise benchmark for internet-scale external attack surface management” MiniMax M2.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Intruder vs AttaxionIntruder vs Cortex XpanseAttaxion vs CyCognitoAttaxion vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface ManagementAttaxion vs Censys ASMAttaxion vs UpGuard BreachSightAttaxion vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementCyCognito vs Cortex XpanseMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs Cortex XpanseCensys ASM vs Cortex XpanseUpGuard BreachSight vs Cortex XpanseCortex Xpanse vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full ASM standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.