XM Cyber
Last updated: Oct 8, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to XM Cyber's?
The following comparison table enables you to discern the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company's cybersecurity needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | XM Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) |
| Extras | None | None | External Attack Surface Management (EASM) |
| Headcount | 186 | Same | 433 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42%, IT 12%, sales 16%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 24% | Same | Engineering 30%, IT 17%, sales 9%, marketing 4%, operations 5% and others 35% |
| Headcount growth | +3%, +21%, +29% | Same | -5%, -2%, +10% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | AU, DE, IL and US |
| Countries | AR, BO, BR, CL, CO, CR, DO, EC, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | AU, BR, CA, CH, CO, DE, ES, FR, GB, HK, IL, IN, IT, JP, MX, MY, NG, PH, PK, SE, SG, TR, US, VN and ZA |
| Reputation | 9.27 from 388 reviews over 7 years on Clutch, G2 and Gartner | Same | 7.87 from 180 reviews over 4 years on G2, Gartner and PeerSpot |
| Followers | 23K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 41K based on the following: Facebook, LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | Forrester, Frost & Sullivan, Gartner and IDC |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2016 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | 49M USD in 4 rounds from 5 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | Acquired 1 time and made 2 acquisitions |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 1M to 250M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | None |
| Compliance | GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, ISO/IEC 27701:2019, PCI DSS, SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3 | Same | GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 27017, ISO/IEC 27018 and SOC 2 Type II |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 64K per month. Top 3: 18% CO, 9% US, 5% BR. Others 68% | Same | 65K per month. Top 3: 18% US, 9% GB, 9% EG. Others 66% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 34 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | None |
| Content | Blog, documentation, e-books, glossary, reports, success stories, videos, webinars and white papers | Same | Advisories, blog, case studies, checklists, courses, e-books, glossary, news, press releases, reports, research, solution briefs, videos, webinars and white papers |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections | Same | No |
| Community | Forum | Same | Chat(Slack) |
| Sync training | 1 workshop | Same | No |
| Async training | 3 product use courses, all free | Same | 2 security education courses |
| Distribution | Direct or with any of its 14 partners | Same | Direct or with any of its 17 partners |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | AWS and GCP |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | No |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales, marketplace and public web |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | 2 plans (XM Essential and XM Pro). Transparent. |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | Annually |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | Monthly |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: AI SAST, API security testing, MAST, PTaaS, RE and SCR | Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) |
| Minimum scope | 10 authors | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | No information available |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | XM Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|
| PTaaS | No | Yes | No |
| Reverse engineering | No | Yes | No |
| Secure code review | No | Yes | No |
| Pivoting | No | Yes | No |
| Exploitation | No | Yes | No |
| Manual reattacks | Not applicable | Unlimited reattacks | Not applicable |
| Zero-day vulnerabilities | Scanner-based zero-day vulnerability detection | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research | None |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | Availability and response |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | 99.9% per month |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | Yes |
| Accreditations | CNA, Penetration Testing by CREST and OpenSSF Gold Badge | Same | None |
| Pentester certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | Not applicable |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee |
| Endpoint control | No | Total | No information available |
| Channel control | No | Total | No information available |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards, 7 in common and 60 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 9 standards, 7 in common and 2 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | AI and automated tools |
| Remediation | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 | 3, 2 in common and 1 additional |
| Output | 5, 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 2 | 1 in common |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | XM Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | No |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same, plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | No |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Does not break the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 18 sources, 2 in common and 16 additional | Same | 2 sources, all in common |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Transitivity and Use | Same | CVSS and EPSS |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No information available |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house |
| SCA | 19 package managers | Same | No |
| AI security | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reachability | 14 languages | Same | No |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Not applicable |
| SBOM | 22 package managers | Same | No |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | No |
| Autofix on components | No | No | No |
| Containers | 4 distributions | Same | Yes. No information available |
| Source SAST (languages) | 14 | Same | No |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 23 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | No |
| IaC | 6 | 2 | No |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary | Same, plus 2 types of binaries | No |
| DAST | 7 attack surface types | Same | No |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs | No |
| MAST | No | Yes | No |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| CSPM | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Secrets | 228 secrets types | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | Yes. No information available |
| AI | 4 functions, 1 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 function | 5 functions, 1 in common and 4 additional |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | No | No | No |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS + on-premises (no tenancy information) |
| Regions | US | Same | AP, CA, EU, IL, ME and US |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 3 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | XM Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6 | Same | None |
| Binary repositories | None | None | None |
| Ticketing | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 2, 1 in common and 1 additional |
| ChatOps | None | None | None |
| IDE | 3 | Same | None |
| CI/CD | 21 | Same | None |
| SCA | Native | Same | None |
| Container | Native | Same | Native |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | None |
| MAST | None | Native | None |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Cloud | 1 in common | Same | 4, 1 in common and 3 additional |
| CSPM | Native | Same | Native |
| Secrets | Native | Same | Native |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | None |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
The latest update to this comparison was on 2026-09-30. The primary source of information was xmcyber.com, which was supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like XM Cyber
Free trial — Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start your 21-day free trial and discover the benefits of the Essential plan. If you prefer the Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' pentesting team, fill out this contact form.
Tags
aisecuritycomparecontainerscspmctemeasm