Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Axonius vs Device42 comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Axonius
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
IT Vendor Risk Management (5th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (1st)
Device42
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (7th), Configuration Management Databases (2nd), IP Address Management (IPAM) Tools (3rd), Data Center Infrastructure Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Axonius and Device42 aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Axonius is designed for Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) and holds a mindshare of 28.5%, down 36.1% compared to last year.
Device42, on the other hand, focuses on IT Asset Management, holds 4.2% mindshare, down 6.2% since last year.
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Axonius28.5%
Armis17.9%
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management10.9%
Other42.7%
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
IT Asset Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Device424.2%
ServiceNow13.8%
Lansweeper6.6%
Other75.4%
IT Asset Management
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Director of cloud security at Nuxeo
Centralized asset tracking has transformed governance and now speeds incident response
I would add that currently, the tool supports some integrations, but we would expect it to support broader integration with other security tools, observability, or any other cloud integrations. One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved. The user interface needs improvement because it is a bit laggy sometimes, making it not straightforward when we want to identify things quickly, leading us to go in different directions which could be better tied together in one place.
reviewer2783919 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Vice President at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Granular discovery has ensured confident workload migration and optimized cloud move group planning
Device42 offers the best features for workload assessment, particularly useful for cloud-to-cloud workload or on-premise data center workload, especially when planning for workload migration to the public cloud. For application and infrastructure discovery, Device42 has enabled me to know the number of machines running in the on-premise environment and has managed to capture complete utilization metrics or trends of their utilization. This has benefited me in right-sizing systems for my public cloud total cost of ownership (TCO) planning, providing me granularity to right-size these systems while planning a migration to the public cloud. Device42 has positively impacted my organization by providing granularity toward application discovery compared to other assessment tools, which is a differentiator since none of the other tools provide such granularity, leading to better decision-making for my migration to the public cloud. Device42 has improved my migration projects by providing granularity around system dependencies that gave me confidence knowing which systems communicate with each other parked in a particular move group. My move group planning became so robust that I am not leaving any system behind in the on-premise data center from my planning, which saves a lot of time and effort, leading to cost optimization—a value addition.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The automation capabilities in Axonius have streamlined our security operations."
"Overall, I would rate Axonius an eight out of ten."
"I like that the tool has a user-friendly interface. It helps organizations and big companies improve business requirements and control processes."
"The solution's technical support was good...The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."
"he best feature I found in Axonius is that it shows us the duration of eCheck, and it shows us what device is down and in which part of the system life cycle or the checking part the system is down in."
"With this solution in place, we are now 100% compliant along with security functions or operations area management."
"Axonius provides preconfigured dashboards that can be customized to your needs."
"Device42 positively impacts my organization because we build the as-is as soon as possible, avoiding the delays we would face with the network or security teams, and I captured more than 100 traffic entries in just two weeks, which was great."
"It has agentless discovery; you don't need to put agents on your servers. You can open one or two ports to discover all your infrastructure."
"The auto-discovery is brilliant. You can have it scheduled to run on a regular basis, and the infrastructure is always getting updated within the platform. I would rate the asset discovery very highly. It's very comprehensive. It covers quite a lot of different methods for doing discovery and it supports a lot of different types of hardware as well."
"One of the most valuable features in my experience is the precise tracking of hardware devices and their locations registered in the solution. The solution allows to determine the exact placement of assets based on the building maps and the room details. This feature has allowed us to gain upper hand on the customers and provide them with a great satisfaction because they can visually see the arrangement of their assets within the organisation or building."
"The topology layout is the most valuable feature."
"The IP address tracking [is valuable]... We have a lot of different devices and some of them have many IP addresses, so keeping track of which ones are assigned where is very critical for putting new devices on the network and giving them new addresses. All of our devices are statically assigned, so if we don't keep good records then we could accidentally assign a duplicate, which would cause problems on the network."
"Device42 is a fantastic tool for workload discovery, and I believe everyone should start using it if they have plans to do so; it is a top-notch tool in the market."
"The asset inventory is great because previously we had devices all over the place. We have been able to do multiscans to find devices that we didn't know about, which was great."
 

Cons

"For us, the product's deployment phase was a little challenging because we had to deal with other departments and business units."
"Axonius could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors."
"Adding more detailed descriptions or YouTube videos about specific features would help improve the application."
"We can have fetch cycle issues."
"One area Axonius can be improved is its integration process, as it is not straightforward; there is a lot involved in cloning the instance and other hard changes that I expect to be fully automated, suggesting an agentless method instead of utilizing agents, which feels somewhat legacy but could be improved."
"For Axonius, I would suggest supporting more ticketing platforms and enhancing API integration directly into the platform rather than just the connector. This would allow for better integration from different systems, possibly into workflows, which I think is currently lacking."
"Regarding the improvement of Axonius, it goes halfway for both the tool and the user. If we set it up quickly from our end, and if the AD groups and all other groups assigned to tag the assets have been tagged correctly, Axonius could not show an error."
"Axonius can improve on delivering compliance-related features."
"I think the graphical representation of all associated machines needs improvement to better illustrate how these systems have dependencies on each other."
"Since I was focused on deploying connectors and getting all the servers to be scanned, one of the biggest pains was when a job would fail, then the output (logging) was poor. For example, "Why did it fail?" In these cases, you get a generic error. It doesn't point you in the right direction and tell you why you got the error, which is really annoying. There have been times I asked, "Is there somewhere I can see a better log as to why is this failing?" That would be a really nice improvement."
"The resources table needs a few tweaks. We've raised a feature request for this. When you click on resources, it opens up the entire CMDB or the entire data stored in Device42. If that could be customizable, it would be good. We should be allowed to add our own columns to that by writing a script or something like that. There should be an option to add or limit whatever we want."
"Currently, if you want to ping devices, you need to log into Appliance Manager. This feature should be available on the Device42 side. You should be able to use the ping utility without logging into Appliance Manager. The features that are there in Appliance Manager should also be available on the main Device42 server so that you have more control on one screen. You don't need to switch to another portal, but it is not something critical."
"When servers have two network adapters, automatically discovered will be only one network card because the other one is a backup. Device42 has some problems to find the other connection."
"The architecture is a bit old-fashioned. Device42 is on one server, appliance, virtual machine, or guest. We are loading more into Device42 than it can hold. Overloading Device42 with REST API calls or tasks will directly impact every aspect because the server will be too busy to answer requests."
"The dependency mapping can be quite slow sometimes, if you've got a lot of things connecting to services. It can be very slow to build up the map."
"If I want to delete an asset from a cabinet it does take a while. And if I'm doing it in bulk — say, for example, if we have one cabinet that has 20 servers in — if I want to remove all 20 servers, I have to do them individually, which is a bit time-consuming. If there were a way that I could just bulk-remove everything from there, that would definitely save some time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Axonius is quite a bit cheaper compared to other solutions."
"We are on a subscription model with them."
"Functionality-wise, Device42 is on par with industry standards, but price-wise, the solution is expensive. I'm rating the pricing for the solution as eight out of ten."
"Our licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"On a yearly basis, our licensing is $10,000. However, our license is now nearly full with devices. We need the next bigger license with 5,000 devices, which will cost us $19,000. We pay for a set of licenses, a maximum number of devices, and a maximum number of IP addresses. We have the smallest amount of features, which is enough for us at this time."
"I am not involved in its pricing, but I have seen their plans during a discussion with the customer. For 500 servers, they were asking 50,000 USD. The cost of BMC Discovery was less than half. For the same thing, they were charging only 10,000 USD. Its pricing needs to be improved. As compared to other discovery tools, such as BMC Discovery and ServiceNow Discovery, its price is a little bit higher."
"The problem with using other vendor, like BMC, is the pricing. The price is so horrible and nobody wants to pay this money."
"It's in the top-three most expensive solutions in terms of cost, but it has all the features that are needed."
"We pay $100,000 per year."
"The product cost is low. It is quite cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Axonius?
I think I am good so far with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing; I do not see any disturbances there, but it is working well.
What needs improvement with Axonius?
I would add that currently, the tool supports some integrations, but we would expect it to support broader integration with other security tools, observability, or any other cloud integrations. One...
What is your primary use case for Axonius?
My main use case for Axonius is config management and asset inventory. I use Axonius to maintain the asset inventory up to date and also to identify the owners quickly; these are the primary requir...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Device42?
I felt the pricing was a little bit mid-range as compared to the other tools which are out there in the market. For example, I felt the BMC Discovery pricing was quite high. So I think the pricing ...
What needs improvement with Device42?
Device42 can improve in the area of updates. If automatic updates were available for the solution instead of having customers go through the process of downloading and uploading update packages the...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Extreme Engineering Solutions, AppsFlyer, Landmark Health, Natera
Computershare, Concur, Doosan, Fitch Ratings Inc., Fujitsu, HomeAway, Jasper Wireless, Mercedes-Benz, Square, Twitch, UCSB, Zayo Group Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Axonius, Qualys, Armis and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Updated: January 2026.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.