IT AI Index
Index › Security operations › ASM › Intruder vs Attaxion
Attack surface management · September 2026 Edition

Intruder vs Attaxion

Nine of twelve models named Intruder first on the direct prompt; zero named Attaxion. Intruder was named by twelve of the twelve models and Attaxion by ten and Intruder carries 32 labels and Attaxion 21, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Intruder

endorsed leader

Named in three categories this edition.

Attaxion

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share59%11%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate3%5%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#2A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels3221A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Intruder reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Intruder vs Detectify · Attaxion vs Detectify

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all twelve models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the attack surface management page.

By framing

How many of the twelve models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
IntruderFirst choices, of twelve modelsAttaxion
Direct90
Paraphrase81
Comparative00
Budget-constrained84
Scale-constrained10
Negative001 against Intruder · 1 against Attaxion
Bars are first choices, 0 to 12 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to twelve.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Intruder and Attaxion stood in it.

Intruder first, Attaxion an alternative

9 of 12 modelsAttaxion was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
Claude Haiku 4.5Intruder alternatives: CyCognito, Hadrian, UpGuard BreachSight
Gemini 3.5 FlashIntruder alternatives: CyCognito, Detectify, runZero
Perplexity SonarIntruder alternatives: Attaxion, ThreatScope
Grok 4.1 FastIntruder alternatives: Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Rapid7 Exposure Command, UpGuard BreachSight
Mistral SmallIntruder alternatives: Attaxion, Detectify
DeepSeek V4 FlashIntruder alternatives: Attaxion, Detectify, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Rapid7 ASM
Kimi K2Intruder alternatives: Censys ASM, Detectify
GLM 4.7 FlashXIntruder alternatives: Attaxion, Detectify, Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management, Patrowl
MiniMax M2.5Intruder alternatives: Attaxion, Detectify, ThreatScope

Neither was named

3 of 12 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniRapid7 Surface Command alternatives: Bitsight, Cortex Xpanse, Tenable Attack Surface Management
Llama 4 Maverickno first choice
Qwen 3.7 FlashCisco Vulnerability Management alternatives: Censys ASM, Drata, Vanta

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Intruder leads by fifty points.
Intruder52%#1 of 11
Attaxion2%#6 of 11
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Intruder leads by forty-eight points.
Intruder59%#1 of 13
Attaxion11%#2 of 13
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Intruder0%#– of 12
Attaxion0%#– of 12
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Intruder

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.

“External tools (like Intruder or Detectify) focus on what the *internet* sees. Avoid using these if your primary goal is managing internal corporate network exposure” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Best value paid option: Intruder is frequently recommended for SMBs due to transparent pricing, comprehensive features, and a free tier that actually works” MiniMax M2.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Intruder is especially noted for its automation and suitability for the mid-market, making it a strong recommendation for most organizations in this category.” Mistral Small · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Intruder is the safest all-around pick (transparent pricing, built for teams without dedicated security staff, strong SMB fit)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Attaxion

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.

“Verdict: Avoid these if you require strict integration workflows.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · hard negative
“If you want an easy commercial dashboard with zero setup and a predictable flat-rate budget, choose Attaxion.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“such as Intruder, Detectify, or Attaxion, which typically cost between $10,000 and $50,000 per year” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“Attaxion - Best Value for SMBs ... Attaxion Starter ($129/mo) | Best value per asset” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared
Intruder vs DetectifyAttaxion vs DetectifyThe full ASM standing

Comparisons are drawn for the top three products in each category. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.