Attack surface management · November 2026 Edition
CyCognito vs Cortex Xpanse
Two of fourteen models named CyCognito first on the direct prompt; zero named Cortex Xpanse. CyCognito was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Cortex Xpanse by twelve and CyCognito carries 43 labels and Cortex Xpanse 31, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share8%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate14%45%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#7A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels4331A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, CyCognito 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 CyCognito · 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.
CyCognitoFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCortex Xpanse
Direct201 against CyCognito · 5 against Cortex Xpanse
Paraphrase113 against Cortex Xpanse
Comparative16
Budget-constrained001 against CyCognito · 1 against Cortex Xpanse
Scale-constrained112 against Cortex Xpanse
Negative004 against CyCognito · 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, CyCognito and Cortex Xpanse were named in the same answer ninety-five times, of the 134 answers naming CyCognito and the 119 naming Cortex Xpanse. In those answers Cortex Xpanse took the first choice thirty times and CyCognito four.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where CyCognito 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 | | |
CyCognito Cortex Xpanse first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, CyCognito on the left and Cortex Xpanse on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where CyCognito and Cortex Xpanse stood in it.
CyCognito first, Cortex Xpanse not the choice
2 of 14 modelsCortex Xpanse was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Gemini 3.5 FlashCyCognito alternatives: Censys ASM, Detectify, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
Mistral SmallCyCognito, Intruder alternatives: Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Neither was the first choice, one was named
7 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
Grok 4.20Intruder alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Exposure Management, CyCognito, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
DeepSeek V4 FlashUpGuard BreachSight alternatives: CyCognito, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
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
Neither was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.GPT-5.4 miniCensys ASM alternatives: IONIX, Intruder, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management
Perplexity SonarIntruder alternatives: Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, UpGuard BreachSight
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashTenable Vulnerability Management alternatives: Censys ASM, Dive, Rapid7
MiniMax M2.5Intruder alternatives: Attaxion, Halo Security
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.
CyCognito0%#13 of 14Cortex Xpanse0%#14 of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
CyCognito leads by four points.
CyCognito8%#3 of 12Cortex Xpanse4%#7 of 12Enterprise
The order flips: Cortex Xpanse leads at enterprise.
Cortex Xpanse44%#1 of 10CyCognito6%#5 of 10What the models said about CyCognito
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Users report high false positive rates, slow support, lack of step-by-step remediation guidance, and pricing that's prohibitive for SMBs” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“CyCognito can miss assets tied to subsidiaries or recent acquisitions if the connection isn't obvious from public data” Claude Haiku 4.5 · negative prompt · soft negative
“Frequent mentions of false positives... Expensive for SMBs; better for larger enterprises with dedicated teams.” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · soft negative
“If you have a dedicated security team: Go with CyCognito. It provides the highest level of technical safety net” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For most modern enterprises, CyCognito and Microsoft EASM are currently leading the market” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Strong candidates to shortlist would be CyCognito (if you have shadow IT complexity)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · scale 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 CyCognitoIntruder vs Cortex XpanseAttaxion vs CyCognitoAttaxion vs Cortex XpanseCyCognito vs Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface ManagementCyCognito vs Censys ASMCyCognito vs UpGuard BreachSightCyCognito vs Tenable Attack Surface ManagementMicrosoft 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.