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

CyberProof vs XM Cyber comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 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

Seemplicity
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
133rd
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
17th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Remediation (4th)
CyberProof
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
95th
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
19th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP) (16th), Penetration Testing Services (21st), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (43rd)
XM Cyber
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
39th
Ranking in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Controls Monitoring (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) category, the mindshare of Seemplicity is 2.3%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CyberProof is 2.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of XM Cyber is 10.0%, down from 14.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
XM Cyber10.0%
Seemplicity2.3%
CyberProof2.3%
Other85.4%
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)
 

Featured Reviews

JL
Vice President Of Security Architecture And Engineering at a hospitality company with 10,001+ employees
Unified vulnerability data has reduced risk and currently cuts duplicate tools and license costs
Seemplicity can be improved by adding additional graphs and charts that make it easier to do trending over time. I had to do some of that manually via manual reports, but Seemplicity already has a feature request for this. Seemplicity has done a pretty good job of keeping up with integrations. One gap that I identified and that Seemplicity is trying to fill now is having a complete end-to-end mapping. Seemplicity currently looks at the external attack surface using tools like Censys, and then looks at the internal side, examining what is in AWS and other clouds using CSPM. However, there is not anything that currently ties a property on the outside to a system on the inside, especially when you have additional security layers like web application firewalls that actually mitigate the risk.
Use CyberProof?
Leave a review
Stephen Owen - PeerSpot reviewer
Group CISO at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
Has significantly improved risk visibility and optimized remediation efforts across dynamic environments
We tightly integrate with APIs, consuming feeds and open source data. We have integrated with XM Cyber, and we are elevating ourselves with AI and MCP tools as we view this as a forerunner to reducing the workload for our agents and IT staff. We're pushing all our security partners to provide AI and MCP tools. Our vision is for them to offer a chat interface where a junior IT or an experienced infrastructure engineer can ask for what needs to be patched next without using an interface. Their current interface is very usable and professional, ranking in the top tier of applications. Their reporting is good, offering custom reports, and their API integration is a new capability that serves us well. We have high expectations for the next generation, such as a chat interface to ask questions. However, everything has been very good. We push the boundaries with digital twins; I understand XM Cyber uses a similar concept of graph databases to map environments. I would like access to that and querying languages, enabling more informed business decisions. XM Cyber sees much of our estate, which is beneficial for making informed decisions, and we can harness those insights and data for business analytics. For instance, it could help us gain insights into change management—if a particular server impacts another and that server is supported by yet another server, we could glean significant insights for change management meetings.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) solutions are best for your needs.
907,664 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
37%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Government
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Construction Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise7
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for XM Cyber?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was that we have a large, complicated estate, and in the licens...
What needs improvement with XM Cyber?
The roadmap is a disadvantage because this kind of technology should incorporate AI. At the moment, we don't have any...
What is your primary use case for XM Cyber?
My major use case for XM Cyber is managing the services in our company, Prosegur Iberia, for Spain and Portugal. We d...
 

Comparisons

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
UST Global
Hamburg Port Authority, Plymouth Rock Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Zafran Security, Wiz and others in Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM). Updated: June 2026.
907,664 professionals have used our research since 2012.