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

Wiz Code vs XM Cyber comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
16th
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
1st
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Wiz Code
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
51st
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
5th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (21st), Cloud Security Remediation (2nd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (11th)
XM Cyber
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
30th
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Controls Monitoring (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 13.6%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Wiz Code is 14.6%, up from 9.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of XM Cyber is 16.2%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Zafran Security13.6%
XM Cyber16.2%
Wiz Code14.6%
Other55.6%
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
Use Wiz Code?
Share your opinion
Stephen Owen - PeerSpot reviewer
Has significantly improved risk visibility and optimized remediation efforts across dynamic environments
We tightly integrate with APIs, consuming feeds and open source data. We have integrated with XM Cyber, and we are elevating ourselves with AI and MCP tools as we view this as a forerunner to reducing the workload for our agents and IT staff. We're pushing all our security partners to provide AI and MCP tools. Our vision is for them to offer a chat interface where a junior IT or an experienced infrastructure engineer can ask for what needs to be patched next without using an interface. Their current interface is very usable and professional, ranking in the top tier of applications. Their reporting is good, offering custom reports, and their API integration is a new capability that serves us well. We have high expectations for the next generation, such as a chat interface to ask questions. However, everything has been very good. We push the boundaries with digital twins; I understand XM Cyber uses a similar concept of graph databases to map environments. I would like access to that and querying languages, enabling more informed business decisions. XM Cyber sees much of our estate, which is beneficial for making informed decisions, and we can harness those insights and data for business analytics. For instance, it could help us gain insights into change management—if a particular server impacts another and that server is supported by yet another server, we could glean significant insights for change management meetings.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) solutions are best for your needs.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
Since we stood Zafran Security up in our private cloud, we handle the maintenance on our side. As we opted not to use...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
In terms of areas for improvement, Zafran Security is doing a really great job as a new and emerging company. Oftenti...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
My use cases for Zafran Security revolve around two primary areas. One is around vulnerability management and priorit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about XM Cyber?
The platform's most valuable feature is attack simulation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for XM Cyber?
We have to pay standard licensing fees. There are no additional costs. It is an expensive product. I rate the pricing...
What needs improvement with XM Cyber?
XM Cyber could identify all areas of vulnerability. They could expand the identification span for different areas.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Dazz.io
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Hamburg Port Authority, Plymouth Rock Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Zafran Security, Cymulate, XM Cyber and others in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM). Updated: September 2025.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.