Documented by Hadrian only: PROVEN, ROUTED and RECHECKED.
Documented by Microsoft Defender EASM only: none.
Documented by both: FOUND.
HEAD-TO-HEAD
Hadrian vs Microsoft Defender EASM: which ASM tool takes an exposure further?
THE SHORT ANSWER
Hadrian scores higher overall on our weights, 6.60 to 4.70. Hadrian scores higher on Proves exploitability and Closes the loop; Microsoft Defender EASM scores higher on Fits the enterprise stack; they tie on Finds the unlisted estate, Routes to an owner, Contains before the patch and Buying transparency. The table below gives the reason for every score.
Hadrian
Rank 4 of 10
Best for: Teams replacing periodic external pentests with continuous, agent-based proof
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 | Hadrian | Microsoft Defender EASM | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|
Finds the unlisted estate 15%WhyHadrian: Scans hourly or on events to keep the external inventory current; subsidiary mapping is not documented. Microsoft Defender EASM: A prebuilt inventory for many organizations plus recursive discovery from seeds. | 7 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Tie |
Routes to an owner 10%WhyHadrian: Machine learning confirms whether an asset belongs to the organization. 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%WhyHadrian: Agentic AI exploits issues to prove impact; Hadrian states it proves exploitability within 15 minutes. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented. | 9 / 10 | 3 / 10 | Hadrian |
Contains before the patch 20%WhyHadrian: No edge rule, playbook or other compensating control is described. Microsoft Defender EASM: No compensating control; remediation actions are triggered downstream after export. | 2 / 10 | 2 / 10 | Tie |
Closes the loop 15%WhyHadrian: Remediation guidance, automatic tickets and automatic regression testing after a 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 | Hadrian |
Fits the enterprise stack 10%WhyHadrian: Names Jira, ServiceNow, GLPI, Slack, Microsoft Teams, SentinelOne, Datadog, Zendesk and HubSpot plus an API. 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%WhyHadrian: NOVA pentests from 1,250 euros per test excluding VAT, and ATLAS on AWS Marketplace at $50,000 per 12 months for up to 250 assets. Microsoft Defender EASM: Self-serve Azure billing against a published billable-asset definition after a 30-day free trial. | 7 / 10 | 7 / 10 | Tie |
Which steps does each tool document?
Hadrian
- FOUNDDocumented
Hourly or event-triggered external scanning.
- OWNEDPartial
Ownership confirmed by machine learning; subsidiary mapping not described.
- PROVENDocumented
Agentic exploitation; proof within 15 minutes, per Hadrian.
- CONTAINEDNot documented
No edge rule or compensating control described.
- ROUTEDDocumented
Automatic ticket creation.
- RECHECKEDDocumented
Automatic regression testing after fixes.
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?
Hadrian
NOVA agentic penetration test: from 1,250 euros per test excluding VAT. ATLAS on AWS Marketplace: 250 assets (domains, IP addresses and certificates) $50,000 per 12 months.
To start: Not specified 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 Hadrian if
- it matters most to you that it proves exploitability (9/10)
- it matters most to you that it closes the loop (9/10)
Choose Hadrian if you want continuous, attack-based proof in place of periodic external pentests, with a price you can see. Look elsewhere if you need edge mitigation or attribution across many subsidiaries.
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, Hadrian or Microsoft Defender EASM?
Hadrian scores higher on our proof criterion (Hadrian 9/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 3/10). Hadrian: Agentic AI exploits issues to prove impact; Hadrian states it proves exploitability within 15 minutes. Microsoft Defender EASM: Dashboards cover vulnerabilities, compliance and hygiene; no exploitability testing is documented.
Can Hadrian or Microsoft Defender EASM contain an exposure before the patch?
Hadrian: not documented on the pages reviewed Microsoft Defender EASM: not documented on the pages reviewed Contain scores: Hadrian 2/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 2/10.
Which is easier to buy, Hadrian or Microsoft Defender EASM?
Hadrian: NOVA agentic penetration test: from 1,250 euros per test excluding VAT. ATLAS on AWS Marketplace: 250 assets (domains, IP addresses and certificates) $50,000 per 12 months. 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: Hadrian 7/10, Microsoft Defender EASM 7/10.
Read next
- Hadrian profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Microsoft Defender EASM profile
Scores, sources and pricing
- Beyond Hadrian: 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