Documented by Cortex Xpanse only: CONTAINED and ROUTED.
Documented by Microsoft Defender EASM only: none.
Documented by both: FOUND.
HEAD-TO-HEAD
Cortex Xpanse vs Microsoft Defender EASM: which ASM tool takes an exposure further?
THE SHORT ANSWER
Cortex Xpanse scores higher overall on our weights, 6.40 to 4.70. Cortex Xpanse scores higher on Finds the unlisted estate, Proves exploitability, Contains before the patch, Closes the loop and Fits the enterprise stack; Microsoft Defender EASM scores higher on Buying transparency; they tie on Routes to an owner. The table below gives the reason for every score.
Cortex Xpanse
Rank 5 of 10
Best for: Palo Alto Networks Cortex estates that want automated response through XSOAR
Microsoft Defender EASM
Rank 10 of 10
Best for: Azure-first teams that want a self-serve start and Azure billing
Which tool scores higher on each criterion?
| Criterion | Cortex Xpanse | Microsoft Defender EASM | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|
Finds the unlisted estate 15%WhyCortex Xpanse: Palo Alto Networks states it scans all 4.3 billion IPv4 addresses several times a day and 500 billion+ ports daily. Microsoft Defender EASM: A prebuilt inventory for many organizations plus recursive discovery from seeds. | 8 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Cortex Xpanse |
Routes to an owner 10%WhyCortex Xpanse: Identifies third-party stakeholders for exposures; subsidiary attribution detail is not on the pages reviewed. Microsoft Defender EASM: Every asset carries a confidence-based state such as Approved Inventory, Candidate or Requires Investigation. | 7 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Tie |
Proves exploitability 20%WhyCortex Xpanse: Exploitability validation is not described on the product pages reviewed; the emphasis is discovery and response. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented. | 5 / 10 | 3 / 10 | Cortex Xpanse |
Contains before the patch 20%WhyCortex Xpanse: Active Response runs built-in automated playbooks against exposures; edge WAF rules are not named. Microsoft Defender EASM: No compensating control; remediation actions are triggered downstream after export. | 7 / 10 | 2 / 10 | Cortex Xpanse |
Closes the loop 15%WhyCortex Xpanse: Routes and remediates through Cortex XSOAR playbooks; a retest after the fix is not described. Microsoft Defender EASM: Findings export to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer, where you build the workflow; no built-in ticketing or retest. | 6 / 10 | 3 / 10 | Cortex Xpanse |
Fits the enterprise stack 10%WhyCortex Xpanse: Native ties to Cortex XSOAR and Prisma Cloud inside the Palo Alto Networks Cortex portfolio. Microsoft Defender EASM: Data connections to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer and Security Copilot in preview; no cross-tenant resource access. | 9 / 10 | 8 / 10 | Cortex Xpanse |
Buying transparency 10%WhyCortex Xpanse: No price from Palo Alto Networks; a UK G-Cloud reseller listing shows £70,850.84 per instance per year. Microsoft Defender EASM: Self-serve Azure billing against a published billable-asset definition after a 30-day free trial. | 3 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Microsoft Defender EASM |
Which steps does each tool document?
Cortex Xpanse
- FOUNDDocumented
Internet-wide IPv4 scanning several times a day.
- OWNEDPartial
Third-party stakeholders identified; subsidiary attribution not detailed.
- PROVENNot documented
Exploitability validation not described on the pages reviewed.
- CONTAINEDDocumented
Active Response automated playbooks.
- ROUTEDDocumented
Routing and remediation through Cortex XSOAR playbooks.
- RECHECKEDNot documented
Retest after a fix not described.
Microsoft Defender EASM
- FOUNDDocumented
Prebuilt inventory plus recursive discovery from seeds.
- OWNEDPartial
Confidence-based inventory states, not owner attribution.
- PROVENNot documented
No exploitability testing documented.
- CONTAINEDNot documented
No compensating control.
- ROUTEDPartial
Via export to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer.
- RECHECKEDNot documented
Retest after a fix not described.
Partial counts as not documented for these three lines.
What do they cost?
Cortex Xpanse
No price from Palo Alto Networks. Reseller price: a UK G-Cloud 14 listing by Khipu Networks shows £70,850.84 per instance per year, no free trial, public-facing attack surface only.
To start: Not published on the pages reviewed.
Microsoft Defender EASM
Billed through Azure on billable assets (approved host:IP combinations, domains and IP addresses) after a 30-day free trial. The per-asset rate is on Microsoft's pricing page; it was not captured in our sources.
To start: A prebuilt inventory for many organizations, or seeds such as domains, IP blocks, hosts, email contacts, ASNs and Whois organizations.
Which should you choose?
Choose Cortex Xpanse if
- it matters most to you that it fits the enterprise stack (9/10)
- it matters most to you that it finds the unlisted estate (8/10)
Choose Cortex Xpanse if Cortex XSOAR already runs your response and you want exposures acted on by playbook. Look elsewhere if proof of exploitability is your main gap.
Choose Microsoft Defender EASM if
- it matters most to you that it fits the enterprise stack (8/10)
- it matters most to you that it finds the unlisted estate (7/10)
Choose Microsoft Defender EASM if you are Azure-first and want an external inventory you can try today. Look elsewhere if you need proof, containment or a built-in fix loop.
Frequently asked questions
Which proves exploitability better, Cortex Xpanse or Microsoft Defender EASM?
Cortex Xpanse scores higher on our proof criterion (Cortex Xpanse 5/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 3/10). Cortex Xpanse: Exploitability validation is not described on the product pages reviewed; the emphasis is discovery and response. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented.
Can Cortex Xpanse or Microsoft Defender EASM contain an exposure before the patch?
Cortex Xpanse documents one: Active Response automated playbooks. Microsoft Defender EASM: not documented on the pages reviewed Contain scores: Cortex Xpanse 7/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 2/10.
Which is easier to buy, Cortex Xpanse or Microsoft Defender EASM?
Cortex Xpanse: No price from Palo Alto Networks. Reseller price: a UK G-Cloud 14 listing by Khipu Networks shows £70,850.84 per instance per year, no free trial, public-facing attack surface only. Microsoft Defender EASM: Billed through Azure on billable assets (approved host:IP combinations, domains and IP addresses) after a 30-day free trial. The per-asset rate is on Microsoft's pricing page; it was not captured in our sources. Buying transparency scores: Cortex Xpanse 3/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 7/10.
Read next
- Cortex Xpanse profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Microsoft Defender EASM profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Beyond Cortex Xpanse: alternatives
Eight alternatives ranked
- Beyond Microsoft Defender EASM: alternatives
Eight alternatives ranked
- Line them up
Add more tools to this comparison
- Exposure triage calculator
Set your own weights and must-haves