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

Axonius vs Brinqa 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

Axonius
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (6th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (1st)
Brinqa
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (41st), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Axonius is designed for Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) and holds a mindshare of 35.3%, down 40.3% compared to last year.
Brinqa, on the other hand, focuses on Vulnerability Management, holds 0.5% mindshare, down 0.5% since last year.
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Gunnia - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates with ServiceNow and provides alerts for deviations
The most valuable feature of Axonius is its ability to deduplicate records and identify which ones are old and stale versus those more relevant. For example, if you haven't logged in today but a system somewhere else mentions you have, Axonius can detect this through various logs like Active Directory, file logging, or Wi-Fi connections. Traditionally, someone would have to make numerous calls and spend a lot of time to find out if you are on-site or connected to a Wi-Fi network. The tool simplifies this process. From my experience, onboarding and adding connectors was pretty easy, especially when integrating with the ServiceNow environment. It worked well for my use case, but the ease of use can depend on the customer's specific needs and what they are trying to achieve.
RB
Allows us to configure the risk algorithm to suit our specific needs
I would give the easiness of the initial setup a seven out of ten. It can be a bit complex. Some connections are straightforward, but some take a long time. Deploying Brinqa took time, as it was done in phases. Initially, it took about six months before we started getting valuable data from it. Then, it expanded from there. The deployment began with a product demo and contract negotiation. We connected some data sources to Brinqa's cloud service, which was straightforward. We used the default risk ranking algorithm but faced issues with the dashboards, so we customized them to fit our organization's needs over a few years. We depended a lot on Brinqa for the deployment. We had some internal resources, but they lacked the needed skills, so it took time to train our two-man team. Initially, it required one person for maintenance, and they spent most of their time on it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"he best feature I found in Axonius is that it shows us the duration of eCheck, and it shows us what device is down and in which part of the system life cycle or the checking part the system is down in."
"Overall, I would rate Axonius an eight out of ten."
"I like that the tool has a user-friendly interface. It helps organizations and big companies improve business requirements and control processes."
"The solution's technical support was good...The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."
"Axonius provides preconfigured dashboards that can be customized to your needs."
"The automation capabilities in Axonius have streamlined our security operations."
"The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities."
 

Cons

"Regarding the improvement of Axonius, it goes halfway for both the tool and the user. If we set it up quickly from our end, and if the AD groups and all other groups assigned to tag the assets have been tagged correctly, Axonius could not show an error."
"Adding more detailed descriptions or YouTube videos about specific features would help improve the application."
"Axonius could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors."
"Axonius can improve on delivering compliance-related features."
"We can have fetch cycle issues."
"For Axonius, I would suggest supporting more ticketing platforms and enhancing API integration directly into the platform rather than just the connector. This would allow for better integration from different systems, possibly into workflows, which I think is currently lacking."
"For us, the product's deployment phase was a little challenging because we had to deal with other departments and business units."
"Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are on a subscription model with them."
"Axonius is quite a bit cheaper compared to other solutions."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.
853,271 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Retailer
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axonius?
Axonius is somewhat costly and has a price above average. It provides great value, but obtaining significant discounts can be challenging. As the tools are unique, they have limited direct competit...
What needs improvement with Axonius?
Axonius could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors. There are cases where Axonius doesn't have full compatibility with some newer solutions that have recently appea...
What is your primary use case for Axonius?
The general use case for Axonius ( /products/axonius-reviews ) is cybersecurity asset management. My company, an IT solution provider, works with Axonius ( /products/axonius-reviews ) to offer both...
What do you like most about Brinqa?
The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Brinqa?
I would rate the costliness of the solution at a seven out of ten. It is on the expensive side and there are some additional fees.
What needs improvement with Brinqa?
Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision. We felt they were somewhat slow in assisting us in maturing our processes. Additionally, we encountered some stab...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Extreme Engineering Solutions, AppsFlyer, Landmark Health, Natera
Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Axonius, Armis, Qualys and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Updated: April 2025.
853,271 professionals have used our research since 2012.