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

Cymulate vs Verodin comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cymulate
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (16th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (11th)
Verodin
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
11th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) category, the mindshare of Cymulate is 20.0%, down from 20.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Verodin is 1.4%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
 

Featured Reviews

Ondrej Kováč - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced cybersecurity solution for attack based vulnerability mng. and upskill platform for SOC.
While Cymulate's technology shows great promise and delivers excellent results, their approach to positioning the solution appears to overlap with other companies like Tenable, making them both direct and indirect competitors. Cymulate must refine their messaging and manage expectations effectively. In my experience, they need to be more attentive internally and mindful of potential negative impacts on customers. They exhibit a high degree of flexibility, which can result in sudden changes without adequate alerting. Communicating with them via phone for business matters can be challenging. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cymulate's technology level at eight, but their business level at four out of ten.
reviewer945171 - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable with good updates but needs a better integration engine
The integration engine needs to improve. We try to integrate it with other tools, especially with Splunk or with the MyDLP engine, and even with Microsoft Exchange. As much as they tried to make it seem like it was easy, it wasn't easy. There was a lot of stuff that we had to do that we ended up having to do via an API or something special for a new case. That's a big issue for me. Integration is daunting. It leaves a lot of room for failure and frustration. There are just little nuances that make everything difficult. You're supposed to be able to flip this toggle thing here, and you're supposed to be able to get the feedthrough from Splunk. Then, from there everything should be perfectly fine. However, when you find out it is not perfectly fine and you find out that it's because this thing isn't necessarily correct, you have to do an update on it or they have to update their file to make it work correctly. It's very small, minute things that aren't quite right. It's not something that you can really pinpoint. There's a lot of nuanced issues. It the nuanced technical issues that you would notice once you cross its path. It's not one of those "Hey, this is something I would know off the top of my head." They are very small nuance issues that make you say "Oh, well I guess we've got to go and change this thing now." You get this with certain tools - mostly with Mandiant tools more than anything else in general. It's one of those Mandiant quirks that still carries on and persists to this day - even with this tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"Cymulate is easy to set up, install, and configure."
"The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"The solution is constantly updating. Their data and security validation are cutting-edge."
 

Cons

"The product must provide consultancy for initial setup."
"The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses."
"The reporting process requires significant improvement as it often takes longer than expected and the quality is lacking."
"The integration engine needs to improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is affordable."
"Cymulate's services are expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
5%
Financial Services Firm
35%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cymulate?
The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cymulate?
The pricing for Cymulate could be better. If I were to rate it, it would be a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with Cymulate?
The main area for improvement in Cymulate is its pricing. The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Euronext, YMCA, Telit, Nemours 
AAFCU, Amuse, Axway, Bank Gutmann, Bank of Thailand, BCC Corporation, Blackboat, CapWealth Advisors, CBC, CERN, Lagardère, Land Bank of the Philippines, laya healthcare, Lindsay Automotive Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Updated: December 2024.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.