Documented by CyCognito only: OWNED, PROVEN, ROUTED and RECHECKED.
Documented by Microsoft Defender EASM only: none.
Documented by both: FOUND.
HEAD-TO-HEAD
CyCognito vs Microsoft Defender EASM: which ASM tool takes an exposure further?
THE SHORT ANSWER
CyCognito scores higher overall on our weights, 6.90 to 4.70. CyCognito scores higher on Finds the unlisted estate, Routes to an owner, Proves exploitability and Closes the loop; Microsoft Defender EASM scores higher on Fits the enterprise stack and Buying transparency; they tie on Contains before the patch. 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
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 | CyCognito | Microsoft Defender EASM | 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. Microsoft Defender EASM: A prebuilt inventory for many organizations plus recursive discovery from seeds. | 9 / 10 | 7 / 10 | CyCognito |
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. Microsoft Defender EASM: Every asset carries a confidence-based state such as Approved Inventory, Candidate or Requires Investigation. | 8 / 10 | 7 / 10 | CyCognito |
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. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented. | 9 / 10 | 3 / 10 | CyCognito |
Contains before the patch 20%WhyCyCognito: No compensating control or automated mitigation is described; exposures wait for the owner's fix. Microsoft Defender EASM: No compensating control; remediation actions are triggered downstream after export. | 2 / 10 | 2 / 10 | Tie |
Closes the loop 15%WhyCyCognito: Step-by-step guidance, owner-linked workflows and a retest after each fix. Microsoft Defender EASM: Findings export to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer, where you build the workflow; no built-in ticketing or retest. | 9 / 10 | 3 / 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. Microsoft Defender EASM: Data connections to Log Analytics and Azure Data Explorer and Security Copilot in preview; no cross-tenant resource access. | 6 / 10 | 8 / 10 | Microsoft Defender EASM |
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. Microsoft Defender EASM: Self-serve Azure billing against a published billable-asset definition after a 30-day free trial. | 6 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Microsoft Defender EASM |
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.
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?
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."
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 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 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, CyCognito or Microsoft Defender EASM?
CyCognito scores higher on our proof criterion (CyCognito 9/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 3/10). CyCognito: Runs 100,000+ unauthenticated black-box tests across 30+ categories without state changes, and added Continuous AI Pentesting in June 2026. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented.
Can CyCognito or Microsoft Defender EASM contain an exposure before the patch?
CyCognito: not documented on the pages reviewed Microsoft Defender EASM: not documented on the pages reviewed Contain scores: CyCognito 2/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 2/10.
Which is easier to buy, CyCognito or Microsoft Defender EASM?
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%". 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: CyCognito 6/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 7/10.
Read next
- CyCognito profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Microsoft Defender EASM profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Beyond CyCognito: 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