Axonius vs Brinqa comparison

The compared Axonius and Brinqa solutions aren't in the same category. Axonius is ranked #2 in CASM , with an average rating of 8.5, and holds a 29.1% mindshare in the category. Brinqa is ranked #54 in VM , and holds a 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Axonius users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Brinqa users who would recommend it.

Axonius

Read 8 Axonius reviews

2,458 Views
1,598 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Brinqa

Read 1 Brinqa review

992 Views
526 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Axonius

Brinqa

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Axonius and Brinqa based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Armis, Axonius, Qualys and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM).

To learn more, read our detailed Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,310 peers since 2012

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

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

IT Vendor Risk Management (6th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (2nd)

Brinqa

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (54th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (54th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (47th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (17th)

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 29.1%, down 36.7% compared to last year.
Brinqa, on the other hand, focuses on Vulnerability Management, holds 0.5% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.

Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Axonius	29.1%
Armis	20.6%
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management	10.4%
Other	39.9%

Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)

Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Brinqa	0.5%
Wiz	8.6%
Tenable Nessus	5.9%
Other	85.0%

Vulnerability Management

Featured Reviews

Sakkemgari Tamagari

Director of cloud security at Nuxeo

Centralized asset tracking has transformed governance and now speeds incident response

I would add that currently, the tool supports some integrations, but we would expect it to support broader integration with other security tools, observability, or any other cloud integrations. One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved. The user interface needs improvement because it is a bit laggy sometimes, making it not straightforward when we want to identify things quickly, leading us to go in different directions which could be better tied together in one place.

Read full review

Remo Belisari

Cybersecurity Director at RB Consultancy

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The automation capabilities in Axonius have streamlined our security operations."

"With this solution in place, we are now 100% compliant along with security functions or operations area management."

"Overall, I would rate Axonius an eight out of ten."

"Axonius provides preconfigured dashboards that can be customized to your needs."

"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."

"The solution's technical support was good...The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."

"I like that the tool has a user-friendly interface. It helps organizations and big companies improve business requirements and control processes."

"The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities."

Cons

"Axonius could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors."

"For us, the product's deployment phase was a little challenging because we had to deal with other departments and business units."

"One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved."

"Adding more detailed descriptions or YouTube videos about specific features would help improve the application."

"Axonius can improve on delivering compliance-related features."

"We can have fetch cycle issues."

"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."

"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."

"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

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

17%

Retailer

15%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	4

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Armis vs Axonius

Compared 30% of the time

ServiceNow vs Axonius

Compared 15% of the time

JupiterOne vs Axonius

Compared 9% of the time

Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management vs Axonius

Compared 7% of the time

ManageEngine IT Asset Management vs Axonius

Compared 2% of the time

More Axonius Competitors

Nucleus vs Brinqa

Compared 22% of the time

Unified Vulnerability Management vs Brinqa

Compared 12% of the time

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Brinqa

Compared 11% of the time

Wiz vs Brinqa

Compared 11% of the time

Tenable Security Center vs Brinqa

Compared 9% of the time

More Brinqa Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Axonius

December 2025

Download Axonius product report

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

November 2025

Download Brinqa product report

Overview

Axonius offers robust asset management, enhancing network visibility by consolidating data from various devices. It excels in automatic device categorization for up-to-date inventories, crucial for compliance and risk assessments. Key features include automated policy enforcement and comprehensive reporting tools, which streamline workflows and improve organizational productivity and security compliance. Integrations with other IT tools further enhance its efficiency.

Axonius

Brinqa specializes in providing a comprehensive approach to cyber risk management for businesses. It integrates data from multiple sources to deliver risk insights tailored to help prioritize and address vulnerabilities effectively.

Focused on understanding and managing cyber risks, Brinqa integrates seamlessly into existing IT frameworks, offering a scalable and customizable platform. By correlating data, it delivers valuable insights into potential vulnerabilities and threats, helping prioritize actions and optimize security measures. Its framework enables predictive risk assessment, fostering a proactive approach in security strategy. With actionable intelligence, it supports robust decision-making to mitigate cyber threats efficiently.

What are Brinqa's Key Features?

Data Integration: Collates data from diverse sources to offer a unified view of risk.
Risk Prioritization: Uses machine learning to highlight critical issues.
Customizable Dashboards: Provides dynamic dashboards for tailored insights.
Automated Reporting: Facilitates comprehensive reporting for compliance.
Predictive Analytics: Offers anticipative evaluations of potential risk factors.

What Benefits Should Users Consider?

Improved Security Posture: Users can effectively focus on critical threats.
Operational Efficiency: Streamlines risk management processes, saving time.
Cost Effectiveness: Optimizes resource allocation, reducing wasted investment.
Enhanced Compliance: Simplifies regulatory adherence with detailed reports.

In healthcare, Brinqa helps protect patient information by continuously monitoring network vulnerabilities. In financial services, its real-time insights help safeguard sensitive transactional data. For energy sectors, it ensures infrastructure security, critically assessing and mitigating risks associated with operational technology.

Brinqa

Sample Customers

Extreme Engineering Solutions, AppsFlyer, Landmark Health, Natera

Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation

Buyer's Guide

Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)

December 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Armis, Axonius, Qualys and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.