Index › Security operations › Vuln management › Intruder vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Vulnerability management platforms · October 2026 Edition
Intruder vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Two of fourteen models named Intruder first on the direct prompt; zero named Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management. Intruder was named by twelve of the fourteen models and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management by ten and Intruder carries 26 labels and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management 23, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in four categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share11%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate0%13%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#6A position in a field of 10; printed, not drawn.
Labels2623A 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.Rapid7 InsightVM was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Rapid7 InsightVM vs Intruder · Rapid7 InsightVM vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management · Tenable Vulnerability Management vs Intruder
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen 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 vulnerability management platforms page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
IntruderFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Direct20
Paraphrase10
Comparative001 against Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Budget-constrained32
Scale-constrained00
Negative002 against Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Intruder and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | |||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | |||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | | ||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | ||
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | | | |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | ||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | | |
Intruder Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Intruder on the left and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Intruder and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management stood in it.
Intruder first, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management not the choice
2 of 14 modelsMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Llama 4 MaverickIntruder alternatives: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Rapid7's Insight platform
Kimi K2Intruder, Rapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Qualys VMDR
Neither was the first choice, one was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashSecPod SanerNow, Vicarius vRx alternatives: CrowdStrike Falcon Spotlight, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Nucleus Security, Rapid7 InsightVM
Perplexity SonarRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR, Vicarius vRx
Grok 4.1 FastRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Intruder, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Mistral SmallRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Intruder, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, SureCloud
DeepSeek V4 FlashRapid7 InsightVM, Vicarius vRx alternatives: Intruder, Tenable Vulnerability Management
GLM 4.7 FlashXQualys VMDR alternatives: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Tenable Vulnerability Management
MiniMax M2.5Rapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Intruder, Tenable One
Muse Glimmer 30BRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Intruder, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus
Neither was named
4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Rapid7 InsightVM alternatives: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Vicarius vRx
GPT-5.4 miniRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Qwen 3.7 FlashRapid7 InsightVM alternatives: Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability Management
GPT-6 LunaTenable Vulnerability Management alternatives: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM
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 forty-five points.
Intruder45%#1 of 11Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management0%#11 of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
Intruder leads by seven points.
Intruder11%#3 of 10Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management4%#6 of 10Enterprise
The order flips: Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management leads at enterprise.
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management8%#5 of 9Intruder0%#– of 9What the models said about Intruder
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.
“The best vulnerability management platform for a mid-market B2B company is Intruder, a user-friendly exposure management platform designed for mid-sized businesses.” Llama 4 Maverick · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.
“Limitations: Feature depth drops outside Windows ecosystem; limited Linux/macOS capabilities” Kimi K2 · comparative prompt · soft negative
“they should not be your *only* vulnerability management platform” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Multi-tenant features are disappointing” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“for a tight budget, I'd start with Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management if you already use Microsoft 365 or Defender” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · first choice
“Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management (free trial / included...) for risk‑based prioritization and remediation” GLM 4.7 FlashX · budget prompt · first choice
“Microsoft-heavy environment: Evaluate Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management first if you already use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint P2” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · alternative
Also compared
Rapid7 InsightVM vs IntruderRapid7 InsightVM vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementTenable Vulnerability Management vs IntruderTenable Vulnerability Management vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementIntruder vs Qualys VMDRIntruder vs ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager PlusIntruder vs Vicarius vRxIntruder vs Tenable NessusQualys VMDR vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs Vicarius vRxMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs Tenable NessusAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full vuln management standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.