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

CyCognito vs Detectify 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

CyCognito
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
12th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (9th)
Detectify
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
39th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Attack Surface Management (ASM) category, the mindshare of CyCognito is 2.2%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Detectify is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Attack Surface Management (ASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CyCognito2.2%
Detectify0.7%
Other97.1%
Attack Surface Management (ASM)
 

Featured Reviews

VO
IT Specialist at Squemart
Automated attack surface mapping has improved risk visibility but still needs better guidance
I believe CyCognito could improve by lowering the false positive rate. When false positives occur with CyCognito, we experience frustrating delays in customer support. Standard support tickets for complaints often take too long to resolve. Additionally, the remediation workflow guidance is sometimes criticized for lacking clear step-by-step instructions on fixing vulnerabilities, requiring manual engineering research. Adding specific code fixes or configuration lines could prevent teams from manually figuring out corrections. Moreover, the tool is somewhat expensive, particularly for small to medium businesses such as ours, pushing smaller IT teams to utilize lower-cost or open-source alternatives. Ideally, a pricing tier favorable to these smaller organizations would be beneficial. I also suggest a consumption-based model based on testing frequency rather than total asset count to enhance platform accessibility. CyCognito also lacks native compliance questionnaire management and vendor scorecard tracking, which could improve overall utility. Finally, while it maps third-party parameters, it cannot fully address lateral movement paths as some other scanners can, requiring reliance on external API integration.
Use Detectify?
Leave a review
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Attack Surface Management (ASM) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
7%
Construction Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CyCognito?
I believe CyCognito could improve by lowering the false positive rate. When false positives occur with CyCognito, we experience frustrating delays in customer support. Standard support tickets for ...
What is your primary use case for CyCognito?
My main use case for CyCognito is attack surface management. It helps me bridge ethical considerations as it serves as a simulation of what an attacker would do in real life, allowing me to continu...
What advice do you have for others considering CyCognito?
CyCognito is deployed in our organization as a multi-tenant public cloud SaaS platform. It analyzes our infrastructure from an outside-in attacker perspective, so it is not deployed as a private cl...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UTA, BERTELSMANN, WIPRO
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about TrendAI, CrowdStrike, Qualys and others in Attack Surface Management (ASM). Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.