Skip to content
Exposure Management FinderExposure Finder

HEAD-TO-HEAD · FACTS ONLY

CyCognito vs IONIX: exposure management facts side by side

SHORT ANSWER

CyCognito describes 5 of the five tool types on the pages we read and IONIX describes 5 and their tool-type coverage matches. On proof, CyCognito describes attack-style testing and IONIX describes safe checks but not attack-style testing. We do not score either; the right choice depends on your estate, current platform, WAFs and capacity to fix.

By The Exposure Desk · Exposure Management Finder · Published 2026-10-11

Desk research from public vendor pages read in September 2026, updated 2026-10-11. Profiles follow our published method; we did not run the products.

How do their shapes compare?

CyCognito shape: described for 5 of 5 tool types.EASMDiscoveryVALProofPLATPlatformCTEMProgrammeWAFEdge
  • CyCognito
  • IONIX
  • Outer point: described on the vendor's pages we read
  • Inner point: not in our sources (it may exist; we did not find it)
The shape shows what each vendor's own pages describe, or how your answers weigh the five tool types. It is not a measure of how well a product works.

What are the facts, side by side?

From each vendor's own pages, read in September 2026 and updated on 11 October 2026. Differs marks rows where the recorded status or check value differs.
FactCyCognitoIONIX
Positioning

An external exposure management platform that starts from your organisation's name, attributes each asset to a subsidiary or brand, and runs more than 100,000 active security tests.

An ASM and exposure management platform that maps subsidiaries and the digital supply chain, validates exploitability with non-intrusive tests, and invokes compensating controls such as WAF rules, with humans approving what agents do.

Deployment

Unauthenticated black-box testing from outside, with no brute force or state changes.

Source: CyCognito active security testing · Read 27 Sep 2026

SaaS with a customer portal at portal.ionix.io; discovery uses 13 techniques and reaches third- and fourth-party assets.

Source: IONIX attack surface discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026

EASM discoveryDescribed

Starts from the organisation's name with no IP ranges or asset lists, and attributes assets to subsidiary, brand or business unit.

Source: CyCognito discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026

Described

Discovery with 13 techniques, including third- and fourth-party assets in the digital supply chain.

Source: IONIX attack surface discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026

Exposure validationDescribed

More than 100,000 tests across 30+ categories, unauthenticated and designed not to change state.

Source: CyCognito active security testing · Read 27 Sep 2026

Described

Non-disruptive active exploitability testing; for new CVEs, safe, non-intrusive validation tests built from public proof-of-concept exploits.

Source: IONIX Live Exposure Defense · Read 11 Oct 2026

Exposure management platformsDescribed

CyCognito calls its product an exposure management platform; internal assets are not described on the pages we read.

Source: CyCognito press release: Continuous AI Pentesting · Read 27 Sep 2026

Described

Describes a six-stage workflow for external exposure; internal vulnerability or identity data are not described on the pages we read.

Source: IONIX homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

CTEM programme supportDescribed

Describes CTEM as "discovery to remediation" and "what ties the platform together": discovery, context, prioritisation, validation and remediation, with a retest after each fix.

Source: CyCognito homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Described

Describes a six-stage workflow (discovery, inventory, assessment, validation, prioritization, remediation) and a CTEM use case "that detects and acts in real time".

Source: IONIX homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

WAF postureDescribed

Its Application Security use case includes ensuring WAF coverage; producing or deploying WAF rules is not described.

Source: CyCognito homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Described

WAF Posture Management identifies WAFs across Akamai, Cloudflare, AWS, Azure, Imperva, Barracuda, Fortinet, Palo Alto Networks, Fastly and 50+ others, and turns a CVE into a deployable WAF rule within 12 hours of publication.

Source: IONIX WAF Posture Management · Read 27 Sep 2026

Subsidiary and owner attributionMatches

Every finding carries a trace of how it was found and why it belongs to the subsidiary, brand or business unit.

Source: CyCognito discovery · Read 27 Sep 2026

Matches

Describes agentic corporate, subsidiary and brand discovery and attributes each asset to a subsidiary or business owner, including assets that arrive through M&A.

Source: IONIX homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Internal as well as external assetsNot in our sourcesNot in our sources
Cloud connections namedDiffersNot in our sourcesMatches

Names Wiz and Palo Alto Prisma Cloud among its integrations.

Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026

Exploitability checkedMatches

Active black-box tests with no brute force or state changes.

Source: CyCognito active security testing · Read 27 Sep 2026

Matches

Non-intrusive exploit simulations.

Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026

Attack-style testingDiffersMatches

More than 100,000 active tests, and Continuous AI Pentesting announced on 16 June 2026.

Source: CyCognito press release: Continuous AI Pentesting · Read 27 Sep 2026

Partly

Validation uses safe, non-intrusive tests built from public proof-of-concept exploits; attack-agent or red-team style testing is not described.

Source: IONIX Live Exposure Defense · Read 11 Oct 2026

Works through your WAF or edgeDiffersNot in our sourcesMatches

Delivers WAF rules for new CVEs into remediation workflows.

Source: IONIX WAF Posture Management · Read 27 Sep 2026

WAF coverage across several vendorsDiffersPartly

Its Application Security use case includes ensuring WAF coverage; producing or deploying WAF rules is not described.

Source: CyCognito homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Matches

Finds unprotected assets, checks enforcement status and detects configuration drift across WAF deployments from 50+ vendors.

Source: IONIX blog: WAF Posture Management launch · Read 27 Sep 2026

Retests after a fixMatches

Retests after each fix.

Source: CyCognito remediation acceleration · Read 27 Sep 2026

Matches

IONIX's homepage lists "Instant re-validation of remediated items".

Source: IONIX homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Routes findings to owners and ticketsMatches

Owner-linked workflows with ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk.

Source: CyCognito remediation acceleration · Read 27 Sep 2026

Matches

Integrations with Jira, ServiceNow, Slack, Splunk and Cortex XSOAR.

Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026

Applies a compensating controlDiffersNot in our sourcesMatches

Describes agentic mitigation that "automatically invoke[s] compensating controls": WAF rules deployable via Akamai, Cloudflare or other supported WAF vendors, and Active Protection for dangling assets and DNS hijacking targets.

Source: IONIX Live Exposure Defense · Read 11 Oct 2026

Price or pricing basis publishedMatches

AWS Marketplace lists CyCognito ASM 250 (up to 250 assets) at $30,000 for 12 months.

Source: AWS Marketplace: CyCognito Attack Surface Management Platform · Read 11 Oct 2026

Matches

AWS Marketplace lists Silver, Gold and Platinum plans at $25,000, $35,000 and $45,000 a month on a 1-month contract.

Source: AWS Marketplace: IONIX Attack Surface Management · Read 11 Oct 2026

Trial or self-serve startNot in our sourcesNot in our sources
Platform it extends

None

None

Integrations

ServiceNow, Jira, Splunk and Zendesk for remediation workflows.

Source: CyCognito remediation acceleration · Read 27 Sep 2026

Names Jira, ServiceNow, Splunk, Microsoft Azure Sentinel, Cortex XSOAR, Slack, Wiz and Palo Alto Prisma Cloud, plus an API, on its validation page. No integrations list is published: ionix.io/integrations returned a 404 in September and the partners page lists none.

Source: IONIX exposure validation · Read 27 Sep 2026

Price

AWS Marketplace, 12-month contract: CyCognito ASM 250 (up to 250 assets) $30,000; 24- and 36-month contracts save up to 8% and 11%. Direct pricing basis: total asset volume (ASM); active IPs and web applications (exposure validation), by quote.

Source: AWS Marketplace: CyCognito Attack Surface Management Platform · Read 11 Oct 2026

AWS Marketplace, 1-month contract, 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 are offered, with savings of up to 10% (24 months) and 20% (36 months). Sold as SaaS by IONIX.IO.

Source: AWS Marketplace: IONIX Attack Surface Management · Read 11 Oct 2026

Where do they differ?

  • Cloud connections named: CyCognito is not in our sources; IONIX matches.
  • Attack-style testing: CyCognito matches; IONIX partly matches.
  • Works through your WAF or edge: CyCognito is not in our sources; IONIX matches.
  • WAF coverage across several vendors: CyCognito partly matches; IONIX matches.
  • Applies a compensating control: CyCognito is not in our sources; IONIX matches.

Choose CyCognito if

  • You want to start from a company name and see the attribution trail for each asset
  • You need proof that a fix worked, through a retest

Choose IONIX if

  • You have many subsidiaries or acquisitions and need each asset tied to an owner
  • Your fastest fix is usually a WAF rule rather than a patch

Which limits should you check?

CyCognito

  • No automated mitigation is described: remediation is guidance, owner-linked tickets and retests.
  • WAF coverage is checked, but producing or deploying WAF rules is not described.

IONIX

  • Validation uses safe, non-intrusive tests; CyCognito, Hadrian and watchTowr describe more aggressive attack-style testing.
  • Internal (behind the firewall) assets are not described on the pages we read.
  • No integrations list is published, and the lowest AWS Marketplace plan is $25,000 a month.

Questions readers ask

Is CyCognito or IONIX better?

Neither is scored on this site. CyCognito describes 5 of five tool types and IONIX 5 on the pages we read, and they differ on 5 recorded facts. Which fits depends on your estate, current platform, need for proof, WAFs and capacity to fix; the finder checks those.

Which of the two proves exploitability?

CyCognito: exploitability checked: Matches; attack-style testing: Matches. IONIX: exploitability checked: Matches; attack-style testing: Partly.

Do CyCognito or IONIX publish prices?

CyCognito: AWS Marketplace, 12-month contract: CyCognito ASM 250 (up to 250 assets) $30,000; 24- and 36-month contracts save up to 8% and 11%. Direct pricing basis: total asset volume (ASM); active IPs and web applications (exposure validation), by quote. IONIX: AWS Marketplace, 1-month contract, 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 are offered, with savings of up to 10% (24 months) and 20% (36 months). Sold as SaaS by IONIX.IO.