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

AttackIQ vs Bitsight 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

AttackIQ
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
25th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (56th), Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (8th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (11th)
Bitsight
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Attack Surface Management (ASM) category, the mindshare of AttackIQ is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bitsight is 4.0%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Attack Surface Management (ASM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Bitsight4.0%
AttackIQ1.5%
Other94.5%
Attack Surface Management (ASM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2797743 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Development Analyst at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Continuous attack simulations have improved real-world threat detection and response skills
The best features AttackIQ offers include being a cybersecurity platform specializing in breach attack simulation and AEF validation, as it tests the organization's defenses by simulating real-world attack behavior, which are aligned with the MITRE ATT&CK framework, providing a platform where I can run real-world attack scenarios and identify and mitigate them. AttackIQ is well-aligned with the MITRE ATT&CK framework and has strong continuous validation. The platform is built to run continuous and automation tests, which helps during point-in-time checks or reduces blind spots. AttackIQ positively impacts my organization as most of my colleagues and seniors have been using it to understand real-world attack scenarios and how to cope with those situations, benefiting the company, colleagues, and team. 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. It has definitely benefited the organization in terms of faster risk identification and faster response times.
SA
Senior AIML Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Continuous monitoring has strengthened external security and improved customer trust
There are areas for improvement; we do notice sometimes finding vulnerabilities which gives us visibility to find them quickly. However, there could be a mechanism they can build on top of that for validation as they identify the issues. What will the real risk be for that identifiable issue? Sometimes it could be open because of the traffic; how they detected it could be seen as vulnerable, but upon testing, it might not be a real issue. It could be a false positive because there could be a honeypot that we built. My thinking is about validation, so if they can build that validation part before they expose the risk to the specific asset, that would help. Additionally, based on their reporting, they could also build risk scores and prioritization, which would also aid us. I would suggest adding dashboards and custom reporting, which could help us by enabling rich custom reports with filters. That is especially for leadership because they will not look at each technical area, but overall they would be looking at the risk score and what the assets or critical exposure areas are. Customizable reporting based on requirements would be valuable. I chose 9 out of 10 because the reporting and dashboards would be the first thing I would consider for improvement, and then the second is about the validation part, which could probably improve to 10 out of 10. I cannot think of too much for additional improvements. Maybe some good automation with the API solutions that could be integrated with the CI/CD pipeline or DevOps tools we are running would also be automated and tested.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product. It's worked well for me."
"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."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"I prefer BitSight due to its patch management capabilities. The score is a valuable feature. I have contacted the customer support through e-mail and their response rate is fast. I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Its customer service team responds quickly."
"The best thing about BitSight is the comprehensive list of risk vectors, covering compromised systems, diligence failures, and behavioral anomalies."
"Bitsight has positively impacted my organization by improving security and customer trust, giving us continuous monitoring so we now find misconfigurations within hours instead of days or weeks, which directly improves our overall security posture and reduces risk as we catch high-risk exposures early, especially unexpected cloud assets or testing endpoints that accidentally went public."
"My advice to others looking into using Bitsight is that it provides a lot of information that was not available before, and it is especially good in recon as it can identify many things about an organization that have never been found earlier, making it a valuable tool."
"Offers open ports from an external point of view."
"The product helps us identify the vulnerabilities of internet-facing applications."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"Its factor analysis feature could be better."
"There may be room for improvement in the methodology for identifying findings, as occasional errors occur on the technical side."
"At the moment, when the vulnerability score decreases, it remains the same for quite a while, even though issues are resolved in 24 hours."
"BitSight could improve the classes and lower-level detections of anomalies that compound the information used to compute the rating."
"Data enrichment is the major issue."
"The solution’s benchmarking should be improved."
"There are areas for improvement; we do notice sometimes finding vulnerabilities which gives us visibility to find them quickly. However, there could be a mechanism they can build on top of that for validation as they identify the issues."
"We found that some of the findings are clear false positives, but they still report that, and based on that, the rating goes down until we rectify them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product has a reasonable price."
"The solution's price is average."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Attack Surface Management (ASM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BitSight?
The product is a little expensive and very oriented to large companies.
What needs improvement with BitSight?
There are areas for improvement; we do notice sometimes finding vulnerabilities which gives us visibility to find them quickly. However, there could be a mechanism they can build on top of that for...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Fannie Mae, Cabela's, BNP Paribas, PWC, AIR Worldwide, Con Edison, The Container Store, OshKosh, Steris, University of South Florida, Emblem Health, Lloyds Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AttackIQ vs. Bitsight and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.