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

Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

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

Microsoft Defender External...
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (33rd)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Ranking in Attack Surface Management (ASM)
2nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Patch Management (4th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Software Supply Chain Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Attack Surface Management (ASM) category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management is 3.2%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is 4.0%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Attack Surface Management (ASM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management4.0%
Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management3.2%
Other92.8%
Attack Surface Management (ASM)
 

Featured Reviews

AndyChan3 - PeerSpot reviewer
General manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Enhanced visibility and exposes vulnerabilities but needs more integration
I am currently in the pilot stage of implementing Microsoft External Attack Surface Management (EASM). My organization is transitioning to a comprehensive track of Microsoft solutions, and we will move to full-scale production in another year, maybe Microsoft External Attack Surface Management…
Nicki Møller - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Enables automation and quick access to necessary information
One of the significant challenges Qualys is discovery, which I know Microsoft excels at. I can't recall how well Qualys performs this function; it seems I might be missing some details. However, if there's one key aspect to focus on, it's discovery—the ability to identify assets that you are not aware of, even when you can see they are present. Understanding what those assets are is crucial. With Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, it was very difficult to extract detections from the system. The features within Qualys are limited to what they have developed. Sometimes a complete overview is needed to push to a Power BI dashboard, Splunk, ServiceNow, or other platforms. The export process is incredibly challenging. We needed a developer to write a hundred-line Python script that would loop over certain assets due to export limitations. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management could improve its integration capabilities. While it generates substantial data, correlating it with other data sources can be challenging. The export process is difficult, and pre-built integrations with other tools could be enhanced for better process implementation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It seems to be better at protecting from cyberattacks."
"Microsoft External Attack Surface Management helps improve the visibility of my exposed vulnerabilities and provides an overview of my security posture across the globe."
"Microsoft External Attack Surface Management helps improve the visibility of my exposed vulnerabilities and provides an overview of my security posture across the globe."
"It de-duplicates findings and helps you understand what the vulnerabilities from your external scans and your external attack surface management are and how they connect to the vulnerabilities on your internal scans."
"I use it primarily with tagging, asset counts, and groups that we can put them in, and we also use it to tell if a device has been merged and seen in Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, so that's beneficial for us too."
"Tags are very useful for us since we can tag virus applications in infrastructure types such as databases, operating systems, or web platforms."
"When you implement a dynamic tag using a query, you do not need to manually tag all the servers. It categorizes all the servers that come under that query. The tagging part is automatically done within a few minutes. It reduces the effort."
"The dashboards are my favorite feature; I can pull up information and create my own dashboards specifically for what I'm looking for."
"Qualys CSAM is valuable for providing end-of-life and end-of-sale information. It gives me visibility into the number of products or hardware items that are end-of-life."
"There are no stability issues, and I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The fact that it is integrated makes it very easy to understand."
 

Cons

"The integration is not as seamless compared to competitors like Palo Alto."
"With Microsoft, support is always crazy, it's not easy to get support."
"Further integration across different Microsoft products would be an improvement."
"Based on the company's budget, Qualys offers limited features, which can also be utilized in other environments."
"One improvement that they can make in the EASM module is the scan frequency. After EASM is configured the first time, it allows you to do the complete configuration, but if you want to reconfigure it, it will not ask or provide any option for scan frequency. For that, you need to raise a case with Qualys and talk to the Qualys team."
"The UI and menu navigation has improved significantly, however, the menus could still be clunky, making navigation within the assets challenging."
"Integration of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, particularly with ServiceNow, takes a very long time, and it needs prioritization of patch rules based on vulnerability risk."
"From the user experience perspective, we need a simpler interface and reduced complexity in certain features, particularly with the Qualys Query Language."
"There can be further simplification to reduce the overall noise and provide ESAM-related data."
"The deployment is somewhat complicated and could be made more user-friendly for most users. It is currently not user-friendly for all users. It is good but can be improved. It is a new product, and they are working on it."
"We encountered some false positives, which required coordination with the IT team for verification."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Qualys is competitively priced for its features. Its pricing is suitable for large organizations with more than 4,000 assets, but for smaller organizations with few assets, such as banks, the costs might be high. They should come up with packages that are suitable for small organizations."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"The pricing is market-competitive."
"The Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management pricing is well-aligned with our usage."
"The pricing is reasonable relative to the features provided, as it collects all module data and operates as a main, centralized inventory, making it a cost-effective solution."
"Though the solution is considered expensive, if bundled with other services such as VMDR or cloud agents, its value would significantly increase. It is currently a bit costly, but with bundling, it could become attractive to more customers."
"The pricing is fair. I would love to see the price come down a little bit, but we do get a lot of value out of it. We are squeezing every ounce of value we can out of the tool."
"The pricing for Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management is reasonable, with an annual subscription costing around $1,000 per year or a monthly subscription starting at approximately $72 per month, depending on the specific package and features included."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Attack Surface Management (ASM) solutions are best for your needs.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management?
Further integration across different Microsoft products would be an improvement. Introduction of more AI automation into the products would also be beneficial. The integration is not as seamless co...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management?
I am currently in the pilot stage of implementing Microsoft External Attack Surface Management (EASM). My organization is transitioning to a comprehensive track of Microsoft solutions, and we will ...
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I think the one thing Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management can do better is the package management and the updating process. Knowing that you can't update any of the packages until you've done the...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I primarily use it for a small, single-site, multi-source setup with multi-WAN inputs. I have a main fiber connection and a couple of failovers while managing different networks across different se...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender External Attack Surface Management vs. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.