Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AttackIQ vs Pentera comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AttackIQ
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
8th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (66th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (23rd), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (5th)
Pentera
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Penetration Testing Services (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) category, the mindshare of AttackIQ is 8.3%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pentera is 30.2%, up from 27.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
 

Featured Reviews

BN
Overall, a good user experience and works well but is hard to set up
I can't think of any features that are lacking just now. It does everything I need it to do. I don't have too much experience with the solution. I need more time to really study the solution to see if there are any shortcomings. The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time.
Richard Marlow - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides good features and helps monitor the status of ransomware protection in an organization
The tool is quite scalable. There's a one-to-one relationship between the engine and how many scans we can do. We can only do one scan with one engine. We had some issues around the password assessments because we added a lot of users. It took a long time. I rate the scalability a seven out of ten. We have three users in our organization.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product. It's worked well for me."
"The platform's most valuable features are credential management and vulnerability management."
"The tool showed us that our ransomware protection wasn’t working on some machines."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"Pentera has many authentic features."
"The product is easy to use."
"Pentera has many authentic features."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The licensing and IP management need improvement. When the IP is imported into a system, we cannot withdraw or revoke the license."
"One of the big issues we have is that the tool has an additional license for compromised credentials. Suppose compromised credentials for any of your domains appear in leaks, dumps, or are being sold. In that case, they try to aggregate that data and highlight that, for example, ten users appeared in recent dumps as compromised credentials. However, they don't provide much information about where those compromises came from or their source information, probably to protect their sources."
"The automated penetration testing features must be improved."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"One area for product improvement could be the inclusion of a dashboard to cover multiple branches and subsidiaries, allowing for centralized monitoring."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product's cost is reasonable. I rate the pricing a three out of ten."
"We have to pay a yearly licensing cost for Pentera."
"It's not that expensive, but it could be more cost-effective."
"The tool is relatively cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Pentera?
What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach.
What needs improvement with Pentera?
The licensing and IP management need improvement. When the IP is imported into a system, we cannot withdraw or revoke the license.
What is your primary use case for Pentera?
I am using the OpenIntra solution for pentesting and managing candidates in my environment. I also use this solution for house customers.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Blackstone Group Caterpillar Apria Healthcare Taylor Vinters Sandler Capital Management Drawbridge BNP Paribas British Red Cross
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.