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

JupiterOne vs runZero 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

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 (50th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (22nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th)
runZero
Ranking in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
6th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) category, the mindshare of JupiterOne is 5.3%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of runZero is 7.4%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
JupiterOne5.3%
runZero7.4%
Other87.3%
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Use runZero?
Leave a review
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Ernest & Young, Sally Beauty, Washington Regional, Zayo, Carnegie Mellon University, GitHub, Sage AI Labs, Recorded Future, GreyNoise Intelligence, National World War II Museum, Coalition, Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Armis, Axonius, Qualys and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Updated: March 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.