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

Astrix vs MetaDefender 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

Astrix
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (3rd)
MetaDefender
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (12th), Anti-Malware Tools (4th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of Astrix is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MetaDefender is 2.0%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
MetaDefender2.0%
Astrix0.5%
Other97.5%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Ahamed Shadhir - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a healthcare company with 11-50 employees
Automated SaaS access governance has reduced OAuth risks and improves audit readiness
The best features are deep OAuth app visibility, real-time risk detection, automated remediation, risk scoring and prioritization, and SaaS-to-SaaS threat detection. The real-time risk detection and alerts have benefited us the most. Astrix continuously monitors connections and third-party apps, flagging high-risk applications automatically when risky permission, suspicious behavior, or unusual access patterns are detected. This helped us considerably. Since deploying Astrix, we've seen a 42% reduction in high-risk third-party OAuth apps, a 65% reduction in dormant SaaS integration, faster vendor offboarding from days to an hour, and improved audit readiness. The faster offboarding has been transformative. Before Astrix, offboarding was mostly manual and checklist-driven. When an employee or vendor left, we would disable their primary account, remove them from groups, manually review shared drives, and try to identify third-party apps they had authorized. After Astrix, it is centralized, automated, and immediate.
RS
Senior Associate at a educational organization with 11-50 employees
File protection has improved and now keeps millions of daily transfers secure and compliant
In my organization, while using this tool, we found that there were a few files flagged as suspicious; however, those were not suspicious and it was a false positive, so that can be improved. False positive results were an issue, and it took time to scan files if the file size was greater than 1 GB. For larger files greater than 1 GB, it needs to be improved. In some cases, the reconstruction of the file led to a failure of code deployment and it flagged a valid file as malicious, which was not effective; however, in other types of files, it was very effective and could scan files properly. We have already covered all the main suggestions; however, it can be improved to reduce false positive results, and scanning could be faster to process more files in a day.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Astrix offers excellent observability features that track the user query, what the user sent, what prompt was sent to the LLM, what the LLM response sent, what retrieval documents were checked, and what tools were called, along with the final response."
"Since deploying Astrix, we've seen a 42% reduction in high-risk third-party OAuth apps, a 65% reduction in dormant SaaS integration, faster vendor offboarding from days to an hour, and improved audit readiness."
"We went from having zero visibility to complete third-party integration visibility, which helps us considerably."
"My advice to others looking into using MetaDefender is that if you are looking ahead at a solution which can be implemented quickly and at a lesser cost, go ahead with it."
"MetaDefender is a useful tool for scanning all incoming and outgoing files and keeping our applications and servers in compliance, and I found it useful because we can integrate it with multiple file transfer tools such as Globalscape EFT, GoAnywhere, or Sterling, which is the best feature as it integrates with multiple tools."
"For one of my clients, a major bank in Turkey, they reported saving approximately 30 percent of their SOC time on analyzing emails since implementing MetaDefender."
"The best features of MetaDefender include its ability to detect malware and vulnerabilities, which I also use at server levels, including production and testing servers, helping me identify and address vulnerabilities by applying patch updates."
"The percentage of accuracy is great and the integration of multi-scanning and Content Disarm and Reconstruction affects my data security operations effectively because OPSWAT blocks the file types that we are not willing to have inside the company or are not approved."
"I like the simplicity, the way it works out of the box. It's pretty easy to run and configure. The integration of the network devices with the ICAP server was easily done."
"MetaDefender has strengthened file security, which is crucial in banking, by reducing the risk of malware through ensuring every file is scanned before reaching users and by improving efficiency with automated file inspection that significantly cuts down time spent on manual checks and reduces malware-related incidents and operational risks."
"MetaDefender has positively impacted my organization by greatly improving our security posture and how we handle files."
 

Cons

"Customer support could be improved so that faster support on services would attract more customers."
"Astrix is good regarding its accuracy and reliability of output, but the initial setup feels somewhat complex."
"Astrix could be improved with deeper coverage on on-premises and hybrid application environments."
"The user interface is complex initially, scanning large or complex files can take longer than expected, false positives occasionally require manual review, and the pricing is somewhat high."
"The UI can be more user-friendly, and initial steps and policy tuning take some time."
"While MetaDefender's mail gateway already gives fewer false positives, there is still room for improvement in reducing those even further."
"In some cases, the reconstruction of the file led to a failure of code deployment and it flagged a valid file as malicious, which was not effective; however, in other types of files, it was very effective and could scan files properly."
"What I would like to see improved in MetaDefender includes reducing the high cost of the license, as the pricing is very high."
"My experience with pricing for MetaDefender is that it is a little bit expensive compared to platforms like Splunk."
"I would rate it an eight because its interface can be improved and it can improve their integrations as well, so there is room for improvement."
"The documentation is not well written, and I often need to talk with support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"We bought a three-year license, and that was pretty expensive. We agreed that it was really worth buying. It could be cheaper, but we understand that quality comes at a price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Educational Organization
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Astrix?
My experience with Astrix's pricing, setup cost, and licensing was satisfactory. The team is very good. The setup was not overly simple, but it was not overly difficult either with the help of the ...
What needs improvement with Astrix?
Everything is functioning well, and new features are already available to improve observability and performance of the AI models.
What is your primary use case for Astrix?
Astrix is used primarily for observability of LLM applications, including AI agents and RAG systems. For example, we have a refund email process where a prompt processes the email and, with some in...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MetaDefender?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is good and at par with other competitors.
What needs improvement with MetaDefender?
I would like to see improvements in the tool's automation capabilities. It would be beneficial if it could automatically create tickets and notify responsible teams about any identified vulnerabili...
What is your primary use case for MetaDefender?
The major use cases of MetaDefender in my work environment involve preventing malware updates, data breaches, and compliance violations through scanning files for malware, vulnerabilities, and sens...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
OPSWAT MetaDefender, MetaDefender Core
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Astrix vs. MetaDefender and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.