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

Cymulate vs SafeBreach comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 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

Cymulate
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (11th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (10th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (3rd)
SafeBreach
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) category, the mindshare of Cymulate is 15.6%, down from 22.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SafeBreach is 8.7%, up from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cymulate15.6%
SafeBreach8.7%
Other75.7%
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
 

Featured Reviews

SB
Security Architec at Shikun & Binui
Support and integration enhance security posture over three years
I don't know if there's something that could be improved. They surprise me. As I mentioned, I returned a month ago. I haven't fully investigated the complete system yet. I must say that we have been with them for around three years. This is amazing because throughout these three years, they have supported us every week. We meet weekly to review results and fix issues together. Apart from occasional days off, this weekly support has been consistent for three years. It's remarkable because many products are sold and then the product teams forget about you, but this isn't the case with Cymulate.
Dmytro Petrashchuk - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at IT Specialist LLC
Breach and attach simulation solution used to test security tools with a valuable library of hacking data
The most valuable feature is the huge library of hack attacks and breach methods. It can run different attacks in a safe manner without damaging anything inside the infrastructure. The great thing is that the database is constantly updating. It has signature attack playbooks to check if a company is protected against a potential attack.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cymulate has positively impacted our organization by helping us to take care of the efficacy and reviewing the policies and configuration."
"With Cymulate, the best features are the capacity to test the EDR or malware, anti-malware solution."
"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"Cymulate is easy to set up, install, and configure."
"The security validation feature helps my organization in assessing our security posture."
"The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting database and attack protection."
"The most valuable feature is the huge library of hack attacks and breach methods."
 

Cons

"The way Cymulate works for EDR could be improved, as it drops payload and requires action from the EDR console for remediation, which can block the whole process of Cymulate execution."
"I will be honest, we have it, but in the last year, I didn't maintain the system until a month ago."
"The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses."
"The reporting process requires significant improvement as it often takes longer than expected and the quality is lacking."
"We have had some trouble with the agents."
"The product must provide consultancy for initial setup."
"I would like to see some integration on the customization and customer support."
"There is room for improvement in the interface. It is not always easy to find the options that you need and not everything is customizable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cymulate's services are expensive."
"The product is affordable."
"The pricing is more expensive than other options on the market today."
"The price starts from about $140,000 so this solution is expensive in my opinion. Maintenance and support is included in the license cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise3
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cymulate?
I don't know if it's expensive. It depends on the modules that you want, or the time, because they give you a tenant. A tenant for you.
What needs improvement with Cymulate?
I don't know if that helped with quick decision making for my security team because I am the security team and you must have a dedicated team to work with this tool. I don't use the analytics modul...
What advice do you have for others considering Cymulate?
With Cymulate, I have experience using the vulnerability management tools. I don't know if I have used the Continuous Security Validation with Cymulate. I don't have that module licensed with Cymul...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Euronext, YMCA, Telit, Nemours 
PayPal, ICON, Netflix, Johnson & Johnson, CVS Health, Pepsi, Kellogg's, Cisco, Deloitte
Find out what your peers are saying about Cymulate vs. SafeBreach and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.