No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AttackIQ vs Verodin comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (43rd), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Verodin
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
9th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) category, the mindshare of AttackIQ is 9.5%, up from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Verodin is 2.2%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AttackIQ9.5%
Verodin2.2%
Other88.3%
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2783439 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps at a marketing services firm with 51-200 employees
Continuous offensive testing has transformed our cloud security and prioritizes critical fixes
The continuous testing and continuous offensive testing are among the best features that AttackIQ offers, and being able to categorize it based on criticality such as very critical, emergency, high, medium, and low is valuable. AttackIQ allows us to resolve issues much quicker because these issues come in categories, enabling us to prioritize them and fix the emergency issues first. It has definitely reduced response time and improved our discoverability of these issues in the first place.
reviewer945171 - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Consultant at a tech consulting company with self employed
Stable with good updates but needs a better integration engine
The integration engine needs to improve. We try to integrate it with other tools, especially with Splunk or with the MyDLP engine, and even with Microsoft Exchange. As much as they tried to make it seem like it was easy, it wasn't easy. There was a lot of stuff that we had to do that we ended up having to do via an API or something special for a new case. That's a big issue for me. Integration is daunting. It leaves a lot of room for failure and frustration. There are just little nuances that make everything difficult. You're supposed to be able to flip this toggle thing here, and you're supposed to be able to get the feedthrough from Splunk. Then, from there everything should be perfectly fine. However, when you find out it is not perfectly fine and you find out that it's because this thing isn't necessarily correct, you have to do an update on it or they have to update their file to make it work correctly. It's very small, minute things that aren't quite right. It's not something that you can really pinpoint. There's a lot of nuanced issues. It the nuanced technical issues that you would notice once you cross its path. It's not one of those "Hey, this is something I would know off the top of my head." They are very small nuance issues that make you say "Oh, well I guess we've got to go and change this thing now." You get this with certain tools - mostly with Mandiant tools more than anything else in general. It's one of those Mandiant quirks that still carries on and persists to this day - even with this tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AttackIQ is solving a lot of the problems that I had before or that we as an organization had before, even the security team, so it is solving all my issues."
"After using AttackIQ, it has helped the team and the company improve on false positives and reduce risk, as most people are now capable of identifying how to work on detection, improving fine-tuning and all those things."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product. It's worked well for me."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product."
"The solution is constantly updating. Their data and security validation are cutting-edge."
"We thought it was a unique tool when we first came across it, we thought it was a value-add - and to this day it still is a value-add in our company."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"The initial setup was difficult. It was not straightforward."
"The integration engine needs to improve."
"The integration engine needs to improve."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Government
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AttackIQ?
I can't think of anything right now about how AttackIQ can be improved because I probably need to use it for a little bit more before I can understand what needs to be improved. So far I don't have...
What is your primary use case for AttackIQ?
We use AttackIQ for automated, continuous testing and offensive testing. We use their scaled offensive testing module in AttackIQ, which continuously validates your environment and cloud environmen...
What advice do you have for others considering AttackIQ?
I would rate AttackIQ a 10 out of 10 because so far I have no issues with it. AttackIQ is solving a lot of the problems that I had before or that we as an organization had before, even the security...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
AAFCU, Amuse, Axway, Bank Gutmann, Bank of Thailand, BCC Corporation, Blackboat, CapWealth Advisors, CBC, CERN, Lagardère, Land Bank of the Philippines, laya healthcare, Lindsay Automotive Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Horizon3.ai, Cymulate, Pentera and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.