Map the whole surface, or prove it on one app?
Hadrian and SuperPentest are both EU autonomous offensive-security platforms, and they solve adjacent problems. Hadrian's strength is breadth — continuous attack-surface management across your external estate, with agentic pentesting on top. SuperPentest's strength is depth and proof on an authorized application: authenticated flows, business logic, the AI agents inside it, and every finding reproduced. Here is where each fits, with Hadrian details from public materials as of October 2026.
The short version: if your priority is discovering and watching a large external attack surface — domains, subdomains, portals, cloud — Hadrian's ASM-plus-agentic-pentest model leads there. If your priority is proving what is exploitable on a known application, including its AI features, with reproduced evidence, that is where SuperPentest focuses. Both keep data in the EU.
At a glance
| Capability | SuperPentest | Hadrian |
|---|---|---|
| Autonomous / agentic | ✓ | ✓ |
| External attack-surface management | Recon within scope | ✓ (Atlas, focus) |
| Web & API testing | ✓ | ✓ |
| Authenticated testing | ✓ | ✓ |
| Access control (IDOR/BOLA) | ✓ | ✓ |
| Business logic | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI-agent & prompt-injection testing | ✓ | — |
| Clean-session reproduction | ✓ | Validates exploitability |
| EU-based / EU hosting | ✓ Frankfurt | ✓ Amsterdam |
Where Hadrian is strong
Hadrian, based in Amsterdam, pairs continuous external attack-surface management (Atlas) with on-demand agentic penetration testing (Nova). Its agents map an organisation's internet-facing assets — domains, subdomains, web apps, APIs, cloud, login and partner portals — confirm which exposures are actually exploitable, and cover authenticated, IDOR, cross-tenant, business-logic and attack-chain testing, with a broad set of ticketing and SIEM/SOAR integrations. It raised $40M in 2026. For teams whose first problem is "what do we even have exposed," that ASM-first breadth is the draw.
Where SuperPentest differs
SuperPentest concentrates on depth and proof on an authorized application rather than external discovery. It performs authenticated testing as each identity you supply, reasons about business logic, and — distinctively — tests the AI agents inside your product (prompt injection, tool-call boundaries, MCP), which general offensive platforms typically do not. Every candidate is reproduced from a clean session with hash-chained request/response evidence mapped to SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI-DSS, NIS2, DORA and OWASP, and pricing is published from €3,500. AI-agent testing →
Which to choose
- Choose Hadrian if your first need is continuous external attack-surface management and exposure validation across a large estate.
- Choose SuperPentest if your need is deep, reproduced testing of a known application and its AI features, with evidence your auditors can use.
- They can be complementary: ASM to find the surface, SuperPentest to prove what is exploitable on the app that matters. See the full field.
FAQ
What is the difference between SuperPentest and Hadrian?
Both are EU autonomous platforms. Hadrian leads on external attack-surface management plus agentic pentesting; SuperPentest focuses on deep authenticated, business-logic and AI-agent testing on an authorized app, with clean-session reproduction of every finding.
Is SuperPentest an alternative to Hadrian?
Yes — for teams prioritising depth and reproduced evidence on a known application, including its AI agents, over broad external discovery. Both are EU-hosted. Verify current capabilities with each vendor.
Evaluate SuperPentest. Book a demo or request an evaluation account. See the full comparison.