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

Axonius vs JupiterOne comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Axonius
Ranking in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (5th)
JupiterOne
Ranking in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (51st), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (21st), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) category, the mindshare of Axonius is 28.4%, down from 35.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JupiterOne is 5.3%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Axonius28.4%
JupiterOne5.3%
Other66.30000000000001%
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Director of cloud security at Nuxeo
Centralized asset tracking has transformed governance and now speeds incident response
I would add that currently, the tool supports some integrations, but we would expect it to support broader integration with other security tools, observability, or any other cloud integrations. One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved. The user interface needs improvement because it is a bit laggy sometimes, making it not straightforward when we want to identify things quickly, leading us to go in different directions which could be better tied together in one place.
CO
Security Analyst at a outsourcing company with 501-1,000 employees
Unified asset visibility has improved investigations and now simplifies tracking security assets
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, JupiterOne uses hostname weights, MAC addresses, or IP addresses to tie devices together, but we have actually requested a way for us to make those determinations ourselves. For example, when externally scanning a device using Qualys, internally it gives an IP address or FQDN, while externally it might be different. We want to be able to decide ourselves that these two devices are the same device even when they have different names and IP addresses for external and internal use. The unified devices feature is valuable and did not used to exist, and it has been fantastic. However, I believe more can be done regarding unified devices, and giving users the privilege to tie them together would be a good addition to the platform. One of the other things that interest us in JupiterOne and why we really wanted to use the tool is the compliance feature. We wanted to use it to track our compliance since we are ISO 27001 certified. However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use. Although there are some works in progress to improve the compliance part of the tool, I think if they can get it up to speed, that would be a really good improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, I would rate Axonius an eight out of ten."
"With this solution in place, we are now 100% compliant along with security functions or operations area management."
"The solution's technical support was good...The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."
"he best feature I found in Axonius is that it shows us the duration of eCheck, and it shows us what device is down and in which part of the system life cycle or the checking part the system is down in."
"The automation capabilities in Axonius have streamlined our security operations."
"In comparing Axonius to other products, I believe its main competitors on the market offer similar functionalities, but my experience with other solutions has shown me that Axonius stands out."
"I like that the tool has a user-friendly interface. It helps organizations and big companies improve business requirements and control processes."
"Axonius provides preconfigured dashboards that can be customized to your needs."
"JupiterOne helps us aggregate all those things on one single platform, allowing us to quickly identify what environment that asset lives in and what type of asset it is."
"The product’s UI is pretty decent and fast."
 

Cons

"We can have fetch cycle issues."
"Axonius could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors."
"Axonius can improve on delivering compliance-related features."
"Adding more detailed descriptions or YouTube videos about specific features would help improve the application."
"For us, the product's deployment phase was a little challenging because we had to deal with other departments and business units."
"For Axonius, I would suggest supporting more ticketing platforms and enhancing API integration directly into the platform rather than just the connector. This would allow for better integration from different systems, possibly into workflows, which I think is currently lacking."
"Regarding the improvement of Axonius, it goes halfway for both the tool and the user. If we set it up quickly from our end, and if the AD groups and all other groups assigned to tag the assets have been tagged correctly, Axonius could not show an error."
"One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved."
"You can only write Python queries in Jupiter, not other languages, like, SQL or PySpark."
"However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are on a subscription model with them."
"Axonius is quite a bit cheaper compared to other solutions."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axonius?
For pricing, I would rate it as a 7, where one represents a high price and ten represents a low price.
What needs improvement with Axonius?
I am generally satisfied with Axonius's reporting features. The reporting part could be simplified for the end user, and it might be beneficial to have tutorials or drafts from the vendor. I want t...
What is your primary use case for Axonius?
My use case for Axonius is extensive as I utilize it in multiple processes, and I would describe the use case for Axonius as great.
What needs improvement with JupiterOne?
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, Jup...
What is your primary use case for JupiterOne?
Our main use case for JupiterOne is as an asset catalog tool where we document all our assets that are integrated from different platforms such as Device42, Qualys, Microsoft M365, and Defender. We...
What advice do you have for others considering JupiterOne?
JupiterOne has many features. Although none comes to mind almost immediately, I know it often depends on how we are able to write or craft the queries. JupiterOne has been very instrumental to me i...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Extreme Engineering Solutions, AppsFlyer, Landmark Health, Natera
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Axonius vs. JupiterOne and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.