Documented by CyCognito only: none.
Documented by IONIX only: CONTAINED.
Documented by both: FOUND, OWNED, PROVEN, ROUTED and RECHECKED.
HEAD-TO-HEAD
CyCognito vs IONIX: which ASM tool takes an exposure further?
THE SHORT ANSWER
IONIX scores higher overall on our weights, 8.05 to 6.90. CyCognito scores higher on Proves exploitability and Closes the loop; IONIX scores higher on Contains before the patch and Fits the enterprise stack; they tie on Finds the unlisted estate, Routes to an owner and Buying transparency. The table below gives the reason for every score.
CyCognito
Rank 3 of 10
Best for: Teams that want proof and a retested fix, starting from nothing but a company name
IONIX
Rank 1 of 10
Best for: Large enterprises with many subsidiaries that want exposures contained and fixed, not only listed
Which tool scores higher on each criterion?
| Criterion | CyCognito | IONIX | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|
Finds the unlisted estate 15%WhyCyCognito: Starts from the organization's name with no IP ranges or asset lists, covering subsidiaries, brands and business units. IONIX: Recursive Connective Intelligence mapping with 13 discovery techniques reaches subsidiaries and third- and fourth-party suppliers. | 9 / 10 | 9 / 10 | Tie |
Routes to an owner 10%WhyCyCognito: Each finding carries a trace of how it was found and which subsidiary, brand or business unit it belongs to. IONIX: Attributes each asset to the relevant subsidiary or business owner automatically; IONIX's claims about fewer false positives are its own. | 8 / 10 | 8 / 10 | Tie |
Proves exploitability 20%WhyCyCognito: Runs 100,000+ unauthenticated black-box tests across 30+ categories without state changes, and added Continuous AI Pentesting in June 2026. IONIX: Non-intrusive exploit simulations, plus safe active testing of new CVEs in Live Exposure Defense; watchTowr, CyCognito and Hadrian document heavier attack-style testing. | 9 / 10 | 8 / 10 | CyCognito |
Contains before the patch 20%WhyCyCognito: No compensating control or automated mitigation is described; exposures wait for the owner's fix. IONIX: Agentic mitigation "automatically invoke[s] compensating controls": WAF rules deployable through Akamai, Cloudflare and other WAFs within its 12-hour Live Exposure Defense SLA, plus Active Protection for dangling assets and DNS hijacking targets. | 2 / 10 | 9 / 10 | IONIX |
Closes the loop 15%WhyCyCognito: Step-by-step guidance, owner-linked workflows and a retest after each fix. IONIX: Routes findings to Jira and ServiceNow, tracks each CVE from identified to resolved, and its homepage states "Instant re-validation of remediated items"; step-by-step fix guidance is described less fully than at CyCognito or Hadrian. | 9 / 10 | 8 / 10 | CyCognito |
Fits the enterprise stack 10%WhyCyCognito: Names ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk for remediation workflows; edge and SOAR connections are not named on the pages reviewed. IONIX: Names Jira, ServiceNow, Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Cortex XSOAR, Slack, Wiz and Prisma Cloud plus an API; a shorter list than the platform suites. | 6 / 10 | 7 / 10 | IONIX |
Buying transparency 10%WhyCyCognito: Publishes its pricing basis and an AWS Marketplace price: $30,000 per 12 months for ASM covering up to 250 assets. IONIX: Lists three monthly plans on AWS Marketplace (Silver $25,000, Gold $35,000, Platinum $45,000 per month on a 1-month contract); no price on its own site and no free trial listed. | 6 / 10 | 6 / 10 | Tie |
Which steps does each tool document?
CyCognito
- FOUNDDocumented
Seedless discovery from the organization's name.
- OWNEDDocumented
Subsidiary, brand or business unit with a trace per finding.
- PROVENDocumented
100,000+ black-box tests; Continuous AI Pentesting since June 2026.
- CONTAINEDNot documented
No compensating control or automated mitigation described.
- ROUTEDDocumented
Owner-linked workflows into ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk.
- RECHECKEDDocumented
Retest after each fix.
IONIX
- FOUNDDocumented
Recursive discovery with 13 techniques, including supply-chain assets.
- OWNEDDocumented
Assets attributed to subsidiary or business owner automatically.
- PROVENDocumented
Non-intrusive exploit simulations; safe active testing in Live Exposure Defense.
- CONTAINEDDocumented
Agentic mitigation invokes compensating controls: WAF rules within the 12-hour SLA; Active Protection reclaims hijackable assets.
- ROUTEDDocumented
Findings and rules delivered into remediation workflows; Jira and ServiceNow named.
- RECHECKEDDocumented
Homepage states "Instant re-validation of remediated items"; Live Exposure Defense tracks CVEs to resolved.
Partial counts as not documented for these three lines.
What do they cost?
CyCognito
Pricing basis published: total asset volume for ASM; active IPs and web applications for exposure validation. AWS Marketplace: CyCognito ASM 250 (up to 250 assets) $30,000 per 12 months; 24-month contracts "save up to 8%", 36-month "save up to 11%".
To start: The organization's name. "No IP ranges, no asset lists."
IONIX
AWS Marketplace, 1-month contract, cost per month: Silver Plan (monthly monitoring) $25,000; Gold Plan (weekly monitoring) $35,000; Platinum Plan (continuous monitoring) $45,000. 12-, 24- and 36-month contracts offered (24 months "save up to 10%", 36 months "save up to 20%"). No price on ionix.io.
To start: Not published on the pages reviewed. IONIX states "immediate time-to-value".
Which should you choose?
Choose CyCognito if
- it matters most to you that it proves exploitability (9/10)
- it matters most to you that it finds the unlisted estate (9/10)
Choose CyCognito if you have no reliable asset list and want proof and a verified fix for each finding. Look elsewhere if you need exposures blocked at the edge before the patch lands.
Choose IONIX if
- it matters most to you that it contains before the patch (9/10)
- it matters most to you that it finds the unlisted estate (9/10)
Choose IONIX if your estate spans many subsidiaries or acquisitions, you run WAFs from vendors such as Akamai or Cloudflare, and you want exploitable exposures blocked at the edge while owners patch. Look elsewhere if you need a price on the vendor's own site or a published integrations list.
Frequently asked questions
Which proves exploitability better, CyCognito or IONIX?
CyCognito scores higher on our proof criterion (CyCognito 9/10, IONIX 8/10). CyCognito: Runs 100,000+ unauthenticated black-box tests across 30+ categories without state changes, and added Continuous AI Pentesting in June 2026. IONIX: Non-intrusive exploit simulations, plus safe active testing of new CVEs in Live Exposure Defense; watchTowr, CyCognito and Hadrian document heavier attack-style testing.
Can CyCognito or IONIX contain an exposure before the patch?
CyCognito: not documented on the pages reviewed IONIX documents one: Agentic mitigation invokes compensating controls: WAF rules within the 12-hour SLA; Active Protection reclaims hijackable assets. Contain scores: CyCognito 2/10, IONIX 9/10.
Which is easier to buy, CyCognito or IONIX?
CyCognito: Pricing basis published: total asset volume for ASM; active IPs and web applications for exposure validation. AWS Marketplace: CyCognito ASM 250 (up to 250 assets) $30,000 per 12 months; 24-month contracts "save up to 8%", 36-month "save up to 11%". IONIX: AWS Marketplace, 1-month contract, cost per month: Silver Plan (monthly monitoring) $25,000; Gold Plan (weekly monitoring) $35,000; Platinum Plan (continuous monitoring) $45,000. 12-, 24- and 36-month contracts offered (24 months "save up to 10%", 36 months "save up to 20%"). No price on ionix.io. Buying transparency scores: CyCognito 6/10, IONIX 6/10.
Read next
- CyCognito profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- IONIX profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Beyond CyCognito: alternatives
Eight alternatives ranked
- Beyond IONIX: alternatives
Eight alternatives ranked
- Line them up
Add more tools to this comparison
- Exposure triage calculator
Set your own weights and must-haves