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

AttackIQ vs JupiterOne 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)
JupiterOne
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
49th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (22nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (5th)
 

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 JupiterOne is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AttackIQ0.6%
JupiterOne0.3%
Other99.1%
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.
CO
Security Analyst at a outsourcing company with 501-1,000 employees
Unified asset visibility has improved investigations and now simplifies tracking security assets
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, JupiterOne uses hostname weights, MAC addresses, or IP addresses to tie devices together, but we have actually requested a way for us to make those determinations ourselves. For example, when externally scanning a device using Qualys, internally it gives an IP address or FQDN, while externally it might be different. We want to be able to decide ourselves that these two devices are the same device even when they have different names and IP addresses for external and internal use. The unified devices feature is valuable and did not used to exist, and it has been fantastic. However, I believe more can be done regarding unified devices, and giving users the privilege to tie them together would be a good addition to the platform. One of the other things that interest us in JupiterOne and why we really wanted to use the tool is the compliance feature. We wanted to use it to track our compliance since we are ISO 27001 certified. However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use. Although there are some works in progress to improve the compliance part of the tool, I think if they can get it up to speed, that would be a really good improvement.

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."
"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."
"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."
"The product’s UI is pretty decent and fast."
"JupiterOne helps us aggregate all those things on one single platform, allowing us to quickly identify what environment that asset lives in and what type of asset it is."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was difficult. It was not straightforward."
"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
"However, the compliance module has not worked well, and we have had to continue tracking our compliance manually with the tools we use."
"You can only write Python queries in Jupiter, not other languages, like, SQL or PySpark."
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%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

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

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 JupiterOne?
There are some features that I have shared with our customer service manager. One of them that is relevant to us at this time is the need for better determination of unified devices. Currently, Jup...
What is your primary use case for JupiterOne?
Our main use case for JupiterOne is as an asset catalog tool where we document all our assets that are integrated from different platforms such as Device42, Qualys, Microsoft M365, and Defender. We...
What advice do you have for others considering JupiterOne?
JupiterOne has many features. Although none comes to mind almost immediately, I know it often depends on how we are able to write or craft the queries. JupiterOne has been very instrumental to me i...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

DeepSurface
No data available
 

Overview

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