No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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) (2nd)
Device42
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (6th), 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 29.0%, down 36.0% compared to last year.
Device42, on the other hand, focuses on IT Asset Management, holds 4.2% mindshare, down 6.3% since last year.
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Axonius29.0%
Armis17.2%
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management11.4%
Other42.4%
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM)
IT Asset Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Device424.2%
ServiceNow13.8%
Lansweeper6.1%
Other75.9%
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.
Manmohan Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Vice President at Hitachi Systems India Private Limited
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

"With this solution in place, we are now 100% compliant along with security functions or operations area management."
"The solution's technical support was good...The product's initial setup phase is pretty straightforward."
"I like that the tool has a user-friendly interface. It helps organizations and big companies improve business requirements and control processes."
"Overall, I would rate Axonius an eight out of ten."
"The automation capabilities in Axonius have streamlined our security operations."
"Axonius provides preconfigured dashboards that can be customized to your needs."
"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."
"It's nice to know that you can set up the scan, schedule it, and sit back."
"Device42 has positively impacted my organization by helping us lead successful migration and transformation projects, and I have successfully completed cloud movement implementation from standard data center deployments to the cloud."
"The continuous asset discovery is good because it means not having to manually input all the small data, such as IP addresses, leases, etc. It helps and saves us a lot of time."
"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."
"It has generally been a really solid and useful tool."
"Before Device42, the company didn't have any kind of asset management software at all, but now that we have Device42, we're integrating every single office into it so we know exactly what's where, which is a huge improvement that has probably halved the time it takes to do the management side of our IT assets."
"The topology layout is the most valuable feature."
"A big plus for Device42 was the auto-discovery. With it, we have updated devices, updated systems, and up-to-date systems."
 

Cons

"Adding more detailed descriptions or YouTube videos about specific features would help improve the application."
"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."
"Axonius can improve on delivering compliance-related features."
"We can have fetch cycle issues."
"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."
"For us, the product's deployment phase was a little challenging because we had to deal with other departments and business units."
"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 could improve by increasing their integrations with more technology vendors."
"The only thing which I have noticed so far that is not good is that we had an issue with some reporting from the tool, reporting we had to export. We couldn't do it in the way we wanted to, so we tried to reach out to their support but it took pretty long until we understood how we can manage the reports. We still haven't received a complete explanation of what we need to do and how to do it."
"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 only thing which I have noticed so far that is not good is that we had an issue with some reporting from the tool, reporting we had to export."
"Device42 is a main part of our processes. We need reliability, not only in terms of the data but with the solution itself. It's really difficult when we have 10 minutes of Device42 downtime because none of our teams can work for those 10 minutes, and it's more time lost if there is longer downtime. An improvement would be to have a cluster implementation of Device42 to have high-availability and ensure that we don't have downtime in case of failure."
"Device42 can be improved by adding more reporting features and architectural diagrams."
"Price-wise, from what I understand from my leadership, Device42 has some cost and it is a bit high compared to other discovery tools such as BMC Discovery or BMC Helix."
"If they could make it so their remote connector could do as much as 10,000 devices, that would be better."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are on a subscription model with them."
"Axonius is quite a bit cheaper compared to other solutions."
"Our licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"The product cost is low. It is quite cheap."
"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."
"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."
"We pay $100,000 per year."
"The problem with using other vendor, like BMC, is the pricing. The price is so horrible and nobody wants to pay this money."
"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."
"It's in the top-three most expensive solutions in terms of cost, but it has all the features that are needed."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) solutions are best for your needs.
885,880 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

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 Enterprise6
Large Enterprise20
 

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?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Device42 are relatively cost-effective and affordable. I do not know if a small organization would be able to afford it, but I presume it would also be co...
What needs improvement with Device42?
Device42 can be improved by adding more reporting features and architectural diagrams. If visual representations for application dependencies could be incorporated, that would be helpful.
 

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 Armis, Axonius, Qualys and others in Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Updated: March 2026.
885,880 professionals have used our research since 2012.