Compare Cobalt and vPenTest 
- Users report that Cobalt excels in its Test Agent Deployment feature, scoring 8.9, which allows for seamless integration into existing workflows, while vPenTest's score of 7.7 indicates room for improvement in this area.
- Reviewers mention that Cobalt's Breach Simulation functionality is highly effective, achieving a score of 9.3, providing users with realistic scenarios to test their defenses, whereas vPenTest's score of 8.7 suggests it may not be as robust in simulating real-world breaches.
- G2 users highlight Cobalt's superior Reporting and Analytics capabilities, with a score of 9.3, which allows for detailed insights into vulnerabilities, compared to vPenTest's score of 8.9, indicating that Cobalt may offer more comprehensive reporting features.
- Users on G2 report that Cobalt's Manual Testing feature is rated at 8.5, providing a solid user experience, while vPenTest's lower score of 7.4 suggests that its manual testing capabilities may not be as user-friendly or effective.
- Reviewers mention that Cobalt's Multi-Vector Assessment feature scores 9.2, allowing for a more thorough evaluation of security across different attack vectors, while vPenTest's score of 8.9 indicates it may not cover as many angles in its assessments.
- Users say that Cobalt's Automated Testing feature is particularly strong, with a score of 9.6, making it a preferred choice for teams looking to streamline their testing processes, whereas vPenTest's score of 8.7 suggests it may not be as efficient in automation.
- SAML-Based SSO
- User And Group Access Controls
- Best Practice Methodology + Coverage Checklist
We engaged Cobalt to perform a penetration test on a small application, including some API testing. Our experience was very positive. Their team was professional and conducted thorough manual security testing tailored to our specific business use case. They...
Testers mostly ran automated tools without carefully checking results, and did not tailor the test according to our brief. Testing was very surface level and barely touched any application business logic.
Have been using for some time. Very impressed with the automated penetration testing. Came from using a vulnerability scanner but hard to demonstrate to customers why a vulnerability is bad until you can use it and show your results. Reporting is very...
Some of the most important findings like a password of "Spring2020" are buried in the narrative instead of presented with the vulnerabilities. The scanner doesn't seem particularly advanced or in-depth. If your organization keeps a good inventory and...
We engaged Cobalt to perform a penetration test on a small application, including some API testing. Our experience was very positive. Their team was professional and conducted thorough manual security testing tailored to our specific business use case. They...
Have been using for some time. Very impressed with the automated penetration testing. Came from using a vulnerability scanner but hard to demonstrate to customers why a vulnerability is bad until you can use it and show your results. Reporting is very...
Testers mostly ran automated tools without carefully checking results, and did not tailor the test according to our brief. Testing was very surface level and barely touched any application business logic.
Some of the most important findings like a password of "Spring2020" are buried in the narrative instead of presented with the vulnerabilities. The scanner doesn't seem particularly advanced or in-depth. If your organization keeps a good inventory and...
