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
48th
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) (8th)
Automox
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
37th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (36th), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) (13th), Patch Management (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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 0.5%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automox0.5%
AttackIQ0.6%
Other98.9%
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.
Raphael Tiji - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at AT&T
Unified patching and remote access have strengthened security and reduced support overhead
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 believe that with some improvement, it could replace other tools that we currently use. Exclusion for updates should be improved in Automox. Integration with Tenable vulnerability management should be improved, as it should be included. I do not have any other improvements needed for Automox that I have not mentioned yet, perhaps only small or wish-list features.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product."
"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."
"They've been adding some new features lately, which I'm not nearly as familiar with, but the ability to just deploy patches and exempt certain machines from certain patches is helpful. For instance, for our servers, we may not want to roll out zero-day patches. We are able to exempt those and make sure that they don't get those policies. We've got certain servers that have to run a particular version of Java, and being able to exempt those servers from receiving Java updates is pretty fantastic."
"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 super easy to use and we haven't found anything easier."
"Automox has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to set up as many policies as needed, so the customization aspect is top-notch."
"Its flexibility is most valuable."
"Out of all these features, if I had to pick one which I'm relying on the most, I would say the automatic patching, because it saves a lot of time and ensures all devices are updated."
"Since using Automox, it has impacted my organization positively because it is absolutely great, has a fantastic price, and I have a better handle on missing patches in the environment."
"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was difficult. It was not straightforward."
"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"I would add that remote support for iOS could be better, and remote support of Linux is also lacking."
"As concerns the patching concepts, there's a bit of a learning curve in terms of working out how Automox wants you to work within the console, not only splitting up everything into groups, but then having the various policies assigned."
"However, I feel Automox's present quirks in its ability to manage multiple clients to constitute its weakest point."
"When we bring on a new client, we need to go into that client and manually set up my account, my chief engineer's account, three technicians' accounts, and a billing person's account all over again, which is annoying. We have probably up to 15 or 16 of our clients on Automox now. For every single one of those, we have had to go in and set this up. Then, if anything changes, we have to remember to go to Automox and change it 15 or 16 times. So, we just want inheritable permissions, and that is it. We have talked to them about this, and they are like, "Yeah, we hear a lot of complaints about it." I am thinking, "Guys, I have been complaining about this for a year and a half. When are you going to do it?" It must be some tricky thing or not an easy fix, because I can only assume if it were easy, then they would have done it by now."
"It should have integrated workstation access. So, there should be a remote desktop feature."
"One area where Automox can be improved is that it does not support offline patching, which could be a limitation for air-gapped or highly restricted environments."
"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."
"The biggest area they need to fix, without a doubt, is the ability to copy and sync profiles and worklets between all of the organizations you manage, and the ability to have top-level user access control across all of the companies that you manage."
 

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'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."
"Its licensing for a year was nine grand. There was no additional fee."
"Automox just charges us a set amount per user, per month, for using the product. That is very important to us. Because it's a cloud-native solution, you're saving on the cost of hosting an on-premises solution on your servers."
"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.""
"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."
"The product is a great value."
"We are on the premium licensing, which is the one that has the API capability that we use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with AttackIQ?
AttackIQ can be improved by implementing more of a security training platform focused on real-world scenarios, simulating real-world attack behavior aligned with the MITRE ATT&CK and NIST frame...
What is your primary use case for AttackIQ?
My main use case for AttackIQ is conducting breach and attack simulation or any kind of new ransomware simulation, basically for executing particular real-world attack scenarios. Regarding my main ...
What advice do you have for others considering AttackIQ?
In my current organization, we are not using AttackIQ; in my previous organization, I have used AttackIQ, and it was more of hands-on training rather than being deployed as a typical tool for impro...
What needs improvement with Automox?
Automox needs some improvement, particularly in that remote support for Linux is lacking. Additionally, remote support for iOS could be better. The integration is seamless.
What is your primary use case for Automox?
Our main use case for Automox is that we as a company need to be Cyber Security Plus compliant, and therefore we need to ensure that our devices are patched regularly. Having over 1,000 devices, ma...
What advice do you have for others considering Automox?
Automox is a modern, simple-to-use, and powerful tool that works well for all sizes of organizations that have a mix of remote, hybrid, and endpoints. Automated patching is a key strength of Automo...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about AttackIQ vs. Automox and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.