Get listed

Hadrian vs CyCognito: event-driven EASM validation or seedless org-wide exposure?

Hadrian Atlas when the primary gap is event-driven validation and on-demand Nova pentests on the external surface. CyCognito when the gap is seedless org-wide discovery, subsidiary attribution, and continuous AI pentesting across exposed assets.

The CMDB still reports full coverage on known hosts. The weekly scanner against that list is green. Monday still opens with an internet-facing asset that never made the inventory: a forgotten subdomain after a rebrand, a cloud service spun up for a pilot, or a subsidiary site inherited in an acquisition security never onboarded.

Between these two, Hadrian centers Atlas continuous external exposure management with event-driven agentic validation, plus optional Nova on-demand agentic pentests. CyCognito centers seedless discovery from the organization name, multi-signal attribution across subsidiaries and acquisitions, and Target Graph continuous AI pentesting across the exposed footprint (design-partner availability in mid-2026 packaging; confirm GA). Both vendors were independent during research on 30 Sep 2026. Hadrian Security (Amsterdam) is not the US manufacturing company of the same name.

Match the requirement you still own: prove what is exploitable on the surface you already watch, or find and attribute the assets your inventory never listed.

Hadrian HadrianCyCognito CyCognito
JobContinuous external exposure management (Atlas) with event-driven agentic validation; optional Nova on-demand agentic pentestingSeedless external attack surface discovery with org and subsidiary attribution; continuous validation plus Target Graph AI pentesting across exposed assets; design-partner availability in mid-2026 packaging, confirm GA
How a bad day closesNew or changed internet-facing asset triggers event-driven retesting; validated exploitable findings reach the queue with remediation context; deeper scoped Nova run when an app needs on-demand depthSeedless map expands the unknown footprint, attributes owners, validates with continuous deterministic tests, then Target Graph points continuous AI pentesting where context says it still matters
Day-to-day workflowValidated external exposures, change-triggered retests, prioritized exploitable risks, optional Nova engagement resultsNewly attributed assets and subsidiaries, validated exposure issues, attack-path priorities, continuous AI pentest findings
DeploySaaS; cloud deploy in minutes; no agents required per Atlas materialsSaaS; no agents or network access required; discovery can start from the organization name
License/pricingAtlas priced by total asset count (quote). Nova about €3,000 per test with bundles. AWS Marketplace lists Atlas 250 assets at $50,000 / 12 months (checked 30 Sep 2026)ASM priced by total assets; AST and ExploitIntelligence by active IPs and web apps (quote). AWS Marketplace lists ASM 250 assets at $30,000 / 12 months (checked 30 Sep 2026)
Who operates itSecOps and exposure teams that want continuous external validation with optional agentic pentest depth from one vendorEnterprise SecOps and exposure teams that need org-wide unknown-asset discovery, subsidiary attribution, and continuous testing across a large external footprint

We reviewed hadrian.io product and pricing pages, CyCognito external exposure and pricing materials, AWS Marketplace listings, and live community threads the same day (30 Sep 2026). We did not run either product in a paid tenant, so this is not a hands-on benchmark. Neither vendor showed an acquisition during research.

Hadrian

Hadrian product site for Atlas external exposure management and Nova agentic pentesting

CyCognito

CyCognito product site for seedless external attack surface and exposure management

Hadrian’s recent first-party signal is the Nova agentic pentesting launch on 24 March 2026, pairing on-demand depth with continuous Atlas coverage. CyCognito’s decisive packaging signal is Continuous AI Pentesting with Target Graph, announced 16 June 2026, aimed at testing beyond a narrow priority-asset list.

Editions and pricing

The invoice question is whether you buy Atlas asset-count continuous validation with optional Nova per-test pentests, or CyCognito ASM with optional AST and ExploitIntelligence modules priced on active IPs and web apps.

Hadrian HadrianCyCognito CyCognito
Ownership (30 Sep 2026)Independent Hadrian Security (Amsterdam). No acquisition announced during research.Independent. No company acquisition announced during research.
How you buy it nowSales quote for Atlas by asset count; Nova per-test pricing on hadrian.io/pricing; AWS Marketplace Atlas listing availableSales quote for ASM / AST / ExploitIntelligence; AWS Marketplace ASM listing available
Public unitsNova about €3,000 per test; Atlas quote by assets; AWS sample $50,000 / year for 250 assetsNo self-serve dollar table on cycognito.com pricing; AWS sample $30,000 / year for ASM up to 250 assets
What the invoice coversContinuous discovery and validated exposures (Atlas); optional M&A and credential-leak add-ons; optional Nova pentest runsSeedless discovery and attribution (ASM); active testing (AST); exploit-context prioritization (EI); continuous AI pentesting packaging on top of that context

Before comparing Marketplace dollars, note the packages differ: Hadrian’s listing is Atlas continuous exposure management (Nova pentests are separate per-test pricing). CyCognito’s listing is ASM discovery/attribution; AST, ExploitIntelligence, and continuous AI pentesting packaging are additional quote modules. The $50,000 vs $30,000 250-asset bands are not like-for-like feature sets. Production quotes still come from sales for real asset counts and module mix.

How unknown assets get found

Hadrian HadrianCyCognito CyCognito
Discovery centerOutside-in continuous map of domains, subdomains, APIs, cloud instances, certificates, and shadow assets; passive scans about every hourSeedless discovery from organization name across cloud, SaaS, APIs, on-prem, AI assets, and third-party exposure; daily refresh cadence available
Attribution and ownershipBusiness-context prioritization on findings; M&A assessment offered as an Atlas add-onMulti-signal attribution to subsidiaries, business units, and acquisitions with evidence attached; strong fit when the org chart and DNS do not match
Change handlingEvent-driven testing: asset or configuration change triggers new validation instead of waiting for a scheduled scan windowContinuous discovery plus continuous deterministic testing; Target Graph re-scopes AI pentesting as the surface and threat context shift
Neighboring inventory toolsComplements CMDB / CAASM by validating what is reachable and exploitable from the outsidePositions against CMDB / CAASM gaps: unmanaged, shadow, and not-yet-onboarded acquisition assets discovered from the outside

How exposure closes

Hadrian HadrianCyCognito CyCognito
Validation modelAtlas agentic AI validates exposures and chains techniques toward real exploitability before notifying; claims zero false-positive notifications in Atlas FAQ100,000+ deterministic tests across 30+ categories continuously; AI pentesting reserved for higher-judgment work via Target Graph
Pentest depthNova on-demand agentic pentests for scoped apps and APIs; priced per test; Atlas discovery can feed Nova scopeContinuous AI pentesting across the exposed surface rather than a narrow top-asset list; announced for design partners and platform packaging in mid-2026
Remediation pathPrioritized validated risks, step-by-step remediation guidance, collaboration tooling, re-validation after fixesOwner mapping, guided remediation, ITSM / CMDB / CAASM integrations, automatic fix validation
Who writes the next stepSecOps triages validated Atlas findings; launches Nova when a release, audit, or critical app needs deeper proofSecOps and asset owners clear attributed issues; continuous AI pentest output feeds the same exposure program

Finding the host is no longer the whole product. Between these two, Hadrian leans harder into change-triggered validation and on-demand Nova depth. CyCognito leans harder into org-scale discovery, attribution, and continuous AI pentesting across the long tail of exposed assets.

Between these two, that ASM pressure is why seedless discovery and continuous validation stay on the shortlist: Hadrian packages event-driven Atlas validation plus optional Nova pentests; CyCognito packages org-wide attribution and Target Graph continuous AI pentesting.

Where they overlap

Both are outside-in EASM-style platforms for unknown internet-facing risk. Both discover external assets, prioritize with business context, validate exploitability, and talk agentic or AI-assisted offensive testing. An RFP that only says “EASM / external exposure management” will get adjacent demos. The remaining split is event-driven Atlas validation plus optional Nova pentests versus seedless CyCognito discovery with subsidiary attribution and Target Graph continuous AI pentesting (design-partner / mid-2026 packaging at first mention – confirm current GA on the quote).

Related comparisons that are not this EASM pair live under Compare, including runZero vs Censys for owned-network asset discovery versus internet-wide attack-surface search.

When to use both

Running Hadrian and CyCognito as two full replacements for each other is usually waste. The narrow split that shows up is CyCognito as the org-wide unknown-asset and attribution layer for complex subsidiary footprints, with Hadrian Atlas and Nova as the event-driven validation and on-demand pentest layer on a defined external surface. If one team owns both queues, pick the workflow whose ownership and validation cadence you already staff.

Choose Hadrian when you need continuous Atlas validation with event-driven retesting and optional Nova agentic pentests. Choose CyCognito when you need seedless org-wide discovery, subsidiary attribution, and continuous AI pentesting (Target Graph; design-partner availability – confirm GA).

FAQs

Was Hadrian or CyCognito acquired?

Neither showed an acquisition during research on 30 Sep 2026. Both remain independent products.

Is this the same job as runZero vs Censys?

No. runZero centers owned-network asset discovery and exposure management. Censys centers internet-wide attack-surface search. Hadrian vs CyCognito is an EASM / external exposure pair focused on unknown internet-facing asset risk plus validation and pentest-style depth.

Does CyCognito only discover assets?

No. Discovery and attribution are the seedless foundation. CyCognito also runs continuous deterministic validation and announced Target Graph continuous AI pentesting in June 2026 so the platform is not inventory-only.

Does Hadrian replace a scheduled pentest vendor?

Atlas is continuous external exposure validation. Nova is on-demand agentic pentesting priced per test. Teams still decide whether that packaging replaces, complements, or scopes traditional human pentests for their compliance and release cadence.

What public prices should buyers note?

Hadrian posts Nova at about €3,000 per test and prices Atlas by asset count. AWS Marketplace listed Atlas at $50,000 / year for 250 assets and CyCognito ASM at $30,000 / year for 250 assets (checked 30 Sep 2026). CyCognito modules beyond ASM are quote-based by active IPs and web apps.