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

Cymulate vs ThreatQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

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

Cymulate
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (1st), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (11th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (1st)
ThreatQ
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms
12th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms category, the mindshare of Cymulate is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatQ is 2.8%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Ondrej Kováč - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced cybersecurity solution for attack based vulnerability mng. and upskill platform for SOC.
While Cymulate's technology shows great promise and delivers excellent results, their approach to positioning the solution appears to overlap with other companies like Tenable, making them both direct and indirect competitors. Cymulate must refine their messaging and manage expectations effectively. In my experience, they need to be more attentive internally and mindful of potential negative impacts on customers. They exhibit a high degree of flexibility, which can result in sudden changes without adequate alerting. Communicating with them via phone for business matters can be challenging. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cymulate's technology level at eight, but their business level at four out of ten.
Yasir Akram - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and pretty stable but needs to be simpler to use
The support team of ThreatQ set up a VM on our VPN, which was SlashNext's private VPN. Then we just initiated some system calls and ThreatQ provided us the configuration file with our settings (like our email, our API key, our URL, our category, etc.). They set up a VM on our private VPN cloud. And then they provided us the configuration file in which we just entered our details like our company URL, our API category, and API keys et cetera. We could just add it on the configuration file. We just uploaded it to the ThreatQ server. After running the system calls, we just initiated the ThreatQ and then performed tasks on the UI, such as categorizing the reports. If we only wanted the report for phishing, then we just manipulated the data on the UI and just extracted the reports. That's all. The deployment was complex. We used high hardware specifications. I don't remember the exact specifications, however, I recall them being high. There were some services that had some compatibility errors. That's why we had our VMs - to make sure that the customer would not face any errors. Everything's deployed with high specifications and custom specifications. That was the biggest challenge for us - to deploy on the customer VMs. On average, deployment takes 15-20 minutes if it's deployed without any errors. I was with one of the NetOps network admin during deployment. We were only two people and we just deployed and installed all services and we executed the deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"Cymulate has positively impacted our organization by helping us to take care of the efficacy and reviewing the policies and configuration."
"Cymulate is easy to set up, install, and configure."
"The security validation feature helps my organization in assessing our security posture."
"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
 

Cons

"The reporting process requires significant improvement as it often takes longer than expected and the quality is lacking."
"I will be honest, we have it, but in the last year, I didn't maintain the system until a month ago."
"The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses."
"The way Cymulate works for EDR could be improved, as it drops payload and requires action from the EDR console for remediation, which can block the whole process of Cymulate execution."
"The product must provide consultancy for initial setup."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is affordable."
"Cymulate's services are expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cymulate?
The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cymulate?
The pricing for Cymulate could be better. If I were to rate it, it would be a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with Cymulate?
The way Cymulate works for EDR could be improved, as it drops payload and requires action from the EDR console for remediation, which can block the whole process of Cymulate execution. They should ...
What do you like most about ThreatQ?
Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy.
What needs improvement with ThreatQ?
The tool is not user-friendly. It is not beginner-friendly. It would be very difficult for a beginner to learn the tool. It will take at least two months to get familiar with it. Building the playb...
What is your primary use case for ThreatQ?
We used the solution for threat mapping and managing IoCs.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Euronext, YMCA, Telit, Nemours 
Radar, Bitdefender, Crowdstrike, FireEye, IBM Security
Find out what your peers are saying about Cymulate vs. ThreatQ and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.