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

Cortex Xpanse vs Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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

Cortex Xpanse
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
2nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (10th), Patch Management (4th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Software Supply Chain Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Attack Surface Management (ASM) category, the mindshare of Cortex Xpanse is 3.1%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is 4.0%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Attack Surface Management (ASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management4.0%
Cortex Xpanse3.1%
Other92.9%
Attack Surface Management (ASM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1442496 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees
Ensures robust security management with seamless integration
We work with the cloud version of Cortex Xpanse. We are working with Palo Alto products right at the moment. We have Cortex and GlobalProtect that we are using. I'm not sure if we utilize Cortex Xpanse's capability to identify internet-facing assets. I'm not sure about the automated threat assessment of Cortex helping prioritize vulnerabilities. I would assess the integration capabilities of Cortex Xpanse as good; no issues so far with integration with other tools from different vendors. Cortex Xpanse supports our organization's regulatory compliance efforts 100%, and it's what we need from it. Right now, I am working only with Palo Alto for security. I am not planning to work with some other vendors. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cortex Xpanse a nine.
AN
Cyber Security Specialist at UBS Financial
Customized dashboards and quick deployment support comprehensive asset management
We use the True Risk Score for vulnerability prioritization, though we do not solely rely upon it since some assets may be decommissioned soon or not in use. From Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, we primarily focus on internet-facing assets. We have created separate tasks for internet-facing assets and track the True Risk dashboard specifically for these assets. If the True Risk Score is higher for any internet-facing assets, then we take action accordingly. The True Risk Score is very helpful for prioritization. The initial setup was straightforward and easy. We needed to create customized tags, group them twice, and validate whether the operating system detection was true positive or false positive. We encountered some false positives, which required coordination with the IT team for verification. In six months, we had approximately 20-25 machines that needed verification on a weekly basis. We coordinated with the IT team to identify the exact operating system specifications.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best feature of the product is that it's easy to manage when we have set it up, and the beneficial impact of Cortex Xpanse for the company is security."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its firewall and antivirus."
"Cortex Xpanse is a strong solution for attack surface management, including digital brand protection and continuous monitoring."
"As an attack surface manager, I highly recommend Cortex Xpanse, especially if there are many services exposed publicly on the internet."
"When there is an alert from Cortex Xpanse regarding a certificate or surface, it prompts us to take immediate action."
"The most valuable aspect is its ability to catch trojans and malware."
"Cortex Xpanse has an easy-to-use user interface."
"The most valuable aspect is its ability to catch trojans and malware."
"Getting different kinds of modules and inventory in one solution is good enough."
"We have had zero attacks since we enabled all the features in Qualys CSAM."
"I recommend Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management due to its superior asset information collection capabilities, including comprehensive hardware and software inventorying."
"The most valuable feature is the Management sensor, which helps identify gaps in policy agent availability, thereby improving agent utilization."
"I mainly appreciate Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management for its patch management capabilities, which are essential in my job for deploying patches and remediating vulnerabilities."
"The best feature is asset discovery through their cloud agent or IP-based scanning."
"The scanning results are pretty good, and some insights are quite valuable."
"Our favorite features are the tagging and the ability to quickly find assets in the portal."
 

Cons

"Cortex Xpanse should offer better customization and configuration options on its dashboard."
"Some improvements are needed in the user interface."
"Some improvements are needed in the user interface. It may require more enhancements."
"Cortex Xpanse needs to add dark-web scanning."
"Regarding technical support, I would rate it as a seven."
"Cortex Xpanse should offer better customization and configuration options on its dashboard."
"There is an issue with the old versions of Cortex, and so when we have an older one with Windows or any OS, we have a problem with its connectivity with the cloud."
"It's challenging to confirm the absolute coverage and penetration of Cortex Xpanse into the Dark Web. The solution lacks comprehensive intelligence on adversaries and risks, which other competitors might provide."
"There have been a couple of times where Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management wasn't accessible and I'd reach out to our TAM and they'd say, 'Qualys is down.' They say, 'We'll let you know when it's back up.' Of course, they never let you know when it's back up."
"Qualys could improve by enhancing its dynamic tagging and role-based access control features, and by refining its user interface for a more intuitive and efficient user experience."
"The only minor issue is occasionally being redirected to multiple teams, causing slight delays."
"There can be further simplification to reduce the overall noise and provide ESAM-related data."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is moderately good, while Rapid7 is slightly much better."
"Based on the company's budget, Qualys offers limited features, which can also be utilized in other environments."
"One downside of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is that I would prefer to see a more interactive dashboard."
"With Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, it was very difficult to extract detections from the system."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex Xpanse is cheaper than other solutions."
"The tool's cost is too high."
"The pricing for Qualys CSAM is nominal."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"The pricing is reasonable relative to the features provided, as it collects all module data and operates as a main, centralized inventory, making it a cost-effective solution."
"Qualys offers excellent value for money."
"The pricing is fair. I would love to see the price come down a little bit, but we do get a lot of value out of it. We are squeezing every ounce of value we can out of the tool."
"The cost for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is high."
"Qualys is competitively priced for its features. Its pricing is suitable for large organizations with more than 4,000 assets, but for smaller organizations with few assets, such as banks, the costs might be high. They should come up with packages that are suitable for small organizations."
"The Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management pricing is well-aligned with our usage."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Attack Surface Management (ASM) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Performing Arts
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Xpanse?
I don't know the licensing or setup cost; I have no idea about the cost.
What needs improvement with Cortex Xpanse?
I'm not sure right now; I have nothing to comment on regarding what could be improved in the product. We are using it and we are satisfied. I have nothing to comment right now on what other feature...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Xpanse?
Cortex Xpanse is usually used for security from clients.
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I think the one thing Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management can do better is the package management and the updating process. Knowing that you can't update any of the packages until you've done the...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I primarily use it for a small, single-site, multi-source setup with multi-WAN inputs. I have a main fiber connection and a couple of failovers while managing different networks across different se...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex Xpanse vs. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.