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

AttackIQ vs Automox comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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

AttackIQ
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
43rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (5th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Automox
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
39th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) (14th), Patch Management (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of AttackIQ is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.6%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automox0.6%
AttackIQ0.6%
Other98.8%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2783439 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps at a marketing services firm with 51-200 employees
Continuous offensive testing has transformed our cloud security and prioritizes critical fixes
The continuous testing and continuous offensive testing are among the best features that AttackIQ offers, and being able to categorize it based on criticality such as very critical, emergency, high, medium, and low is valuable. AttackIQ allows us to resolve issues much quicker because these issues come in categories, enabling us to prioritize them and fix the emergency issues first. It has definitely reduced response time and improved our discoverability of these issues in the first place.
Naqash Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
Automation has saved time and improves secure, centralized patching across all our devices
While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement. I want the custom reports to be even more detailed, specifically where I can add more details. It would be nice to have more filters in reports based on location and department more easily. Secondly, the notifications could be more customizable. Many times notifications come, but we don't have control over which notification is urgent and which is not. For example, if there's an alert of a critical update or pending approval, it can help me focus better. An alert of a security threat could be another type of notification that tells me something is important. Customized notifications would be much better. I would say the user interface could be improved as well. Some parts of the dashboard are a bit hard to understand. If they could be improved to be more intuitive, for example, if it could be easy to navigate between devices and reports, that would be great. I would say if Automox could also provide automation templates, that would help. I know there are templates, but I want more templates. Having ready-made worklets for common tasks can save a lot of time. Lastly, it should also support the interface for mobile screens.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AttackIQ is solving a lot of the problems that I had before or that we as an organization had before, even the security team, so it is solving all my issues."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product. It's worked well for me."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product."
"After using AttackIQ, it has helped the team and the company improve on false positives and reduce risk, as most people are now capable of identifying how to work on detection, improving fine-tuning and all those things."
"Automox has eased our operations; it is very simple to use and does not have heavy workflows."
"The flexibility in creating tools to make changes on remote machines is most valuable to me. The reporting feature is also fantastic because on any given day I can bring up a list of machines that don't have patches, for example. Or I can bring up a list of machines that are in my environment on a certain day. The solution helps me with not only my own role, and what I look for internally myself, but it also helps during audits. I can go in and look at the number of machines in there, and their owners and timelines. It certainly helps tell a story for anything that IT requires."
"It's easy to deploy agents to endpoints."
"Its flexibility is most valuable."
"Automox is the only one that we've found that we can just set and then forget; it simply works and is the best."
"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational."
"I am a strong proponent of Automox; it's a huge time-saver, it's accurate, it's easier to use, and it's way more stable than any endpoint security add-on."
"Automox's real-time visibility and control through its intuitive dashboard is important for our response to emerging threats because it tells us which applications need to be updated on a real-time basis."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"The initial setup was difficult. It was not straightforward."
"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."
"I would add that remote support for iOS could be better, and remote support of Linux is also lacking."
"They need to improve the automation features."
"Sometimes if you want something done you're at the mercy of people having their machines turned on."
"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository. Currently, all updates are provided directly from the internet. So, if you have 1,000 devices, all 1,000 devices go directly out to the internet. We would love the option of being able to put the updates on local storage so that we're not consuming as much bandwidth. That is literally the only thing that we've ever wanted."
"While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement."
"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."
"We would like to see additional detailed reporting for Service providers like us. We had to build our own reports via their APIs to meet our needs."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing and licensing costs have been great for us... My advice to others who are evaluating or thinking of implementing Automox is to give it a shot. If a free trial is still available, definitely use it, because it makes life a lot easier."
"We are on the premium licensing, which is the one that has the API capability that we use."
"We're doing it annually directly through Automox. It is per endpoint. It is $2 and some change per endpoint, but I believe the cost is right around $28,000. Everything is covered in this fee."
"The cost is very reasonable compared to the competition."
"For all these software tools, it is usually a subscription model. There is a monthly charge that we need to pass along to our clients because we are doing all this for their benefit. It is only a couple of bucks a month per computer, and that is a low enough price point where our clients, without exception, have accepted it, and said, "This is great. We will pay that. It sounds like a worthwhile thing.""
"The product is a great value."
"There are no additional costs in addition to the extended licensing fees with Automox. You get your support and your per endpoint license with what you purchased."
"Its licensing for a year was nine grand. There was no additional fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AttackIQ?
I can't think of anything right now about how AttackIQ can be improved because I probably need to use it for a little bit more before I can understand what needs to be improved. So far I don't have...
What is your primary use case for AttackIQ?
We use AttackIQ for automated, continuous testing and offensive testing. We use their scaled offensive testing module in AttackIQ, which continuously validates your environment and cloud environmen...
What advice do you have for others considering AttackIQ?
I would rate AttackIQ a 10 out of 10 because so far I have no issues with it. AttackIQ is solving a lot of the problems that I had before or that we as an organization had before, even the security...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automox?
The cost is very affordable. We have been able to save a lot of time, approximately 30%. Cost reduction has been noticeable, ranging from 50% to 40%, especially because we do not have to travel fro...
What needs improvement with Automox?
Automox has significant potential and we truly appreciate its features and capabilities. However, we have encountered several performance issues, particularly with the remote access tool. We believ...
What is your primary use case for Automox?
Automox serves as a backbone tool for my company. We rely on Automox for application and operating system patching, which ensures that our machines remain compliant and secure. We also take advanta...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about AttackIQ vs. Automox and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.