Matchup · Logged September 2026
Mars Security vs Vega: threat hunting tools compared
Mars Security: Intel-to-hunt platform. Vega: Agentic security operations platform.
Editorial assessment · From vendor product pages, docs and announcements · Updated 2026-10-18
#1=
Mars Security
Joint top pick: intel-driven hunting across your existing stack
#5
Vega
Best for hand-off hypothesis hunts with source-controlled detections
How do they compare on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | Mars Security | Vega | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunt automation | 25% | 9 | 8 | Mars Security |
| Works across existing SIEM and data lakes | 20% | 9 | 7 | Mars Security |
| Analyst effort saved | 15% | 8 | 8 | Tie |
| ATT&CK coverage evidence | 10% | 5 | 8 | Vega |
| Detection-as-code workflow | 10% | 6 | 8 | Vega |
| Deployment | 10% | 9 | 6 | Mars Security |
| Pricing transparency | 10% | 2 | 2 | Tie |
- Hunt automation
- Mars Security: Converts newly published intelligence into hunts and runs them continuously; hypothesis playbooks launched in September 2026.
- Vega: Takes a hypothesis and runs the hunt across sources, showing each step.
- Works across existing SIEM and data lakes
- Mars Security: Queries SIEM, EDR, identity, cloud and Snowflake or Databricks data where it lives, with no ingestion pipeline.
- Vega: Queries sources in place with no ingestion, but its public pages do not name the connectors.
- Analyst effort saved
- Mars Security: Hands analysts a corroborated shortlist and states that no added detection engineering headcount is needed.
- Vega: The vendor says each detection triages, investigates and tunes itself.
- ATT&CK coverage evidence
- Mars Security: Rules are described as ATT&CK-mapped, but we found no public coverage view or tactic-level map.
- Vega: A security assessment shows ATT&CK coverage and gaps; hunt findings become MITRE-mapped detections.
- Detection-as-code workflow
- Mars Security: Backtests each rule on 30 days of the customer's own data; public pages do not describe version control or CI.
- Vega: Detections live in source control, each change with a diff, an author and an approver.
- Deployment
- Mars Security: States deployment in hours with no data ingestion; SOC 2 and listed on AWS Marketplace.
- Vega: Deployment model not published; a public sandbox is available.
- Pricing transparency
- Mars Security: No public price.
- Vega: No public price.
How do they differ in approach?
Mars Security
- Category
- Intel-to-hunt platform
- Hunting approach
- Continuous hunts generated from new threat intelligence; hypothesis playbooks (September 2026)
- Data access
- Federated. Queries data in place; no ingestion pipeline
- Detection workflow
- Native-language queries per source; 30-day backtest on customer data before go-live; version control and CI not described publicly
Vega
- Category
- Agentic security operations platform
- Hunting approach
- Autonomous hunts from a hypothesis or threat briefing, with each step shown
- Data access
- Queries sources in place; no ingestion
- Detection workflow
- Source control with diff, author and approver; cross-platform detection-as-code
What do they publish about pricing and deployment?
| Fact | Mars Security | Vega |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Not published, contact sales | Not published, contact sales |
| Deployment | "Deploys in hours" with no ingestion; SOC 2; listed on AWS Marketplace | Not published |
| Company | Headquartered in New York (per September 2026 press release) | Offices listed in Tel Aviv and New York |
Mars Security
Source: marssec.ai · marssec.ai/guides/ai-threat-hunting · marssec.ai/guides/cloud-threat-hunting · marssec.ai/blog · Mars press release on securityboulevard.com (September 2026) · Reviewed Sep 2026
Vega
Source: vega.io · vega.io/platform · vega.io/platform/threat-hunting · vega.io/solutions/cross-platform-detection-as-code · vega.io/platform/connectors · Reviewed Sep 2026
Which should you choose?
Choose Mars Security if
- Choose Mars Security if you want hunts that start on their own from new intelligence or a hypothesis. Mars Security scores 9 of 10 on hunt automation: Converts newly published intelligence into hunts and runs them continuously; hypothesis playbooks launched in September 2026.
- Choose Mars Security if your data is spread across a SIEM, EDR, identity provider, cloud logs or a data lake and you want to hunt it where it sits. Mars Security scores 9 of 10 on working across existing SIEM and data lakes: Queries SIEM, EDR, identity, cloud and Snowflake or Databricks data where it lives, with no ingestion pipeline.
Choose Vega if
- Choose Vega if you need published evidence of how ATT&CK coverage is measured. Vega scores 8 of 10 on ATT&CK coverage evidence: A security assessment shows ATT&CK coverage and gaps; hunt findings become MITRE-mapped detections.
- Choose Vega if your rules go through version control, review and testing before they ship. Vega scores 8 of 10 on detection-as-code workflow: Detections live in source control, each change with a diff, an author and an approver.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Mars Security or Vega?
On our weights Mars Security scores higher, 7.45 against 7.00. Which fits better depends on your priorities: Mars Security leads on hunt automation, working across existing SIEM and data lakes and deployment and Vega leads on ATT&CK coverage evidence and detection-as-code workflow. The calculator lets you apply your own weights.
Do Mars Security and Vega publish pricing?
Mars Security: Not published, contact sales. Vega: Not published, contact sales.
Do Mars Security or Vega replace a SIEM?
Neither is scored here as a SIEM replacement. Both work with the SIEM and the other data platforms a team already runs.