Attack surface management · November 2026 Edition
Censys ASM vs UpGuard BreachSight
One of fourteen models named Censys ASM first on the direct prompt; one named UpGuard BreachSight. Censys ASM was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and UpGuard BreachSight by eleven and Censys ASM carries 30 labels and UpGuard BreachSight 22, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in two categories this edition.
First-choice share6%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate20%9%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#6A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels3022A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Censys ASM 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 Censys ASM · Intruder vs UpGuard BreachSight · Attaxion vs Censys ASM
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.
Censys ASMFirst choices, of fourteen modelsUpGuard BreachSight
Direct112 against Censys ASM
Paraphrase11
Comparative00
Budget-constrained101 against UpGuard BreachSight
Scale-constrained00
Negative004 against Censys ASM · 1 against UpGuard BreachSight
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, Censys ASM and UpGuard BreachSight were named in the same answer twenty-one times, of the 80 answers naming Censys ASM and the 105 naming UpGuard BreachSight. In those answers UpGuard BreachSight took the first choice three times and Censys ASM one.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Censys ASM and UpGuard BreachSight 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 | | |
Censys ASM UpGuard BreachSight first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Censys ASM on the left and UpGuard BreachSight on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Censys ASM and UpGuard BreachSight stood in it.
Censys ASM first, UpGuard BreachSight not the choice
1 of 14 modelsUpGuard BreachSight was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniCensys ASM alternatives: IONIX, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
UpGuard BreachSight first, Censys ASM not the choice
1 of 14 modelsCensys ASM was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.DeepSeek V4 FlashUpGuard BreachSight alternatives: CyCognito, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Intruder alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Surface, CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Tenable Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
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
Qwen 3.7 FlashTenable Vulnerability Management alternatives: Censys ASM, Dive, Rapid7
GPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management alternatives: Censys ASM, CyCognito
Neither was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.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
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Kimi K2Intruder alternatives: CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, SynScan
GLM 4.7 FlashXIntruder alternatives: CyCognito, SecurityScorecard
MiniMax M2.5Intruder alternatives: Attaxion, Halo Security
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
Level: the same share of first choices.
Censys ASM6%#5 of 14UpGuard BreachSight6%#4 of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
Censys ASM leads by two points.
Censys ASM6%#5 of 12UpGuard BreachSight4%#6 of 12Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Censys ASM0%#8 of 10UpGuard BreachSight0%#– of 10What the models said about Censys ASM
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Censys ASM is a platform that several sources explicitly advise caution about or even avoid for certain use cases” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“delivers best-in-class internet scanning as a data layer but offers no validation, making it a strong input rather than a standalone program” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · soft negative
“The interface and workflow can feel more technical; pricing isn't published and may scale beyond mid-market comfort zones.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · soft negative
“If your budget is tight, Censys ASM is usually the best first place to look.” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice
“Censys ASM is probably the best default choice for a mid-market B2B company” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
“My default recommendation: Censys ASM for a mid-sized B2B company” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about UpGuard BreachSight
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of three in this category shown.
“UpGuard has been reported to have false positives, limited API functionality, and customization limitations.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Offers published entry pricing and a free trial, but may be broader than basic EASM needs.” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“For most mid-market B2B companies, UpGuard offers the best balance of capability, price, and B2B-relevant features” DeepSeek V4 Flash · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared
Intruder vs Censys ASMIntruder vs UpGuard BreachSightAttaxion vs Censys ASMAttaxion vs UpGuard BreachSightCyCognito vs Censys ASMCyCognito vs UpGuard BreachSightMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs Censys ASMMicrosoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs UpGuard BreachSightCensys ASM vs Cortex XpanseCensys ASM vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementUpGuard BreachSight vs Cortex XpanseUpGuard BreachSight 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.