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

FortiCNAPP vs WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 18, 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

FortiCNAPP
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
41st
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
26th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (30th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Compliance Management (10th)
WithSecure Elements Exposur...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
78th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
36th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of FortiCNAPP is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM) is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
FortiCNAPP1.7%
WithSecure Elements Exposure Management (XM)0.4%
Other97.9%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Software Engineer at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Improving security insights has been helpful but inconsistent vulnerability tracking needs attention
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user management, and Fortinet IM coming into place, which is not helpful at all because it cuts out the automation part, are the most important things. Lacework FortiCNAPP should have a new clean UI and ease of access for the users as that should be the main concern. There are limitations regarding the scalability of Lacework FortiCNAPP. There are also more limitations with integrations like GitHub or any other pipeline, CI/CD, or ISD. It is glitchy and works well only sometimes, and most of the time, the reports or other things are not properly calculated or circulated with the teams.
PP
System Specialist at Fix-Forum Oy
Stable, scalable, and can be deployed on both cloud and on-premises
We usually need the solution to have extra protection against data breaches, as we have seen with our customers. The solution is deployed on the public cloud The solution works both outside and on-premises of the company, thus preventing secondary breaches from reaching the company's data. The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invaluable. When such issues arise, we promptly acknowledge and take action, effectively collaborating with our teams and the responsible parties for those assets. This enables us to promptly manage problems as soon as they arise."
"The most valuable feature is Lacework's ability to distill all the security and audit logs. I recommend it to my customers. Normally, when I consult for other customers that are getting into the cloud, we use native security tools. It's more of a rule-based engine."
"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
"I find the cloud configuration compliance scanning mature. It generates a lot of data and supports major frameworks like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, providing reports and datasets. Another feature I appreciate is setting custom alerts for specific events. Additionally, I value the agent-based monitoring and scanning for compute nodes. It gives us deeper insights into our workloads and helps identify vulnerabilities across our deployed assets."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."
"The solution works both outside and on-premises of the company, thus preventing secondary breaches from reaching the company's data."
 

Cons

"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."
"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."
"The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."
"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"The cost of the solution is mid-ranged but worth the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user managem...
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
The major use case for Lacework FortiCNAPP is for security. I'm using it for security internally for my company.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Polygraph, FortiCNP, Lacework
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Tenable, Qualys and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.