Empirical Security

- Where Empirical likely differentiates - The local-model capability (organization-specific predictions) is presented by the vendor as a primary differentiator: many vendors blend global exploit signals with asset context, but fewer describe an explicit per-organization model-training approach. - The vendor’s EPSS heritage may be relevant for teams that already operationalize EPSS and seek more tailored predictions. - Where competitors may be stronger - Breadth of platform - Tenable/Qualys/Cisco typically provide scanning, asset discovery, and remediation workflows in a single platform. - Empirical appears to function as an intelligence/modeling layer, meaning buyers generally still need scanners and workflow tooling. - Market validation - Larger vendors have substantial third-party review footprints and reference customers; Empirical has limited public review evidence. - Procurement readiness - Larger vendors often have established security documentation packages, regional hosting options, and compliance attestations. - Competitor pricing comparison (what’s knowable publicly) - Tenable publishes small-footprint starting prices directly (vendor entry products show published pricing for small footprints). - Qualys references flexible pricing but does not provide straightforward public price points. - Cisco provides licensing tier comparison content but not transparent price points. - Empirical: pricing not publicly documented. - Customer testimonials comparing vendors (limited) - No accessible direct user quotes were found comparing Empirical to competitors. - G2’s alternatives page suggests the evaluation set buyers may consider alongside Empirical, but this is not equivalent to customer testimony.