In one paragraph
Artemis Security and Mars Security both appear in this guide's vendor directory. On the autonomy ladder, Artemis Security's own material describes Level 4, Autonomous, human-approved actions and Mars Security's describes Level 3, Continuous hunting, human review. Both state 3 of the twelve capabilities in our matrix. Artemis Security states response actions staged for human approval where Mars Security does not; Mars Security states queries data where it already lives, new rules tested on historical data before release, names its intelligence sources and states a security attestation where Artemis Security does not. This guide does not pick a winner; which differences matter depends on your must-haves.
Guide updated September 2026 · Autonomous Threat Hunting editors
Where do Artemis Security and Mars Security differ?
Artemis Security states, Mars Security does not publish
- Response actions staged for human approval: Response actions are staged and require human confirmation.
Mars Security states, Artemis Security does not publish
- Queries data where it already lives: "Hunt across every log source, cloud, and endpoint without moving a byte."
- New rules tested on historical data before release: Each rule is backtested against 30 days of the customer's own data before it goes live.
- Names its intelligence sources: Advisories from CISA, Mandiant, Unit 42 and Microsoft Threat Intelligence.
- States a security attestation: SOC 2, per its September 2026 announcement.
Both state
Hunts start without a per-hunt request, Findings arrive with corroboration or shown working, Maps hunts or detections to MITRE ATT&CK
Neither states
Detection changes kept in version control, Publishes an open framework or specification, States MCP support, Publishes a list price
How do they compare row by row?
| Capability | Artemis Security | Mars Security | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hunts start without a per-hunt request | StatedContinuous hunts run daily against a growing library and "100+ intelligence feeds". | StatedHunts generated from threat intelligence "run them continuously against the data where it already lives". | Both state it |
| Queries data where it already lives | Partly stated"Hot-path data ingested, high-volume data queried where it lives." | Stated"Hunt across every log source, cloud, and endpoint without moving a byte." | Only Mars Security states it |
| New rules tested on historical data before release | Not publishedHow detections from hunts are reviewed before going live is not published. | StatedEach rule is backtested against 30 days of the customer's own data before it goes live. | Only Mars Security states it |
| Detection changes kept in version control | Not publishedNot described on the pages reviewed. | Not publishedNot described on the pages reviewed. | Neither states it |
| Findings arrive with corroboration or shown working | StatedCorrelates identity, cloud, endpoint and SaaS signals during autonomous investigation. | StatedHands analysts "a corroborated shortlist rather than a scored queue". | Both state it |
| Response actions staged for human approval | StatedResponse actions are staged and require human confirmation. | Not publishedResponse actions are not described on the pages reviewed. | Only Artemis Security states it |
| Maps hunts or detections to MITRE ATT&CK | StatedStates "comprehensive MITRE coverage from day one"; tactic-level detail not published. | StatedProduces MITRE ATT&CK-mapped rules with a severity rating. | Both state it |
| Names its intelligence sources | Partly statedStates "100+ intelligence feeds"; individual feeds are not named on the pages reviewed. | StatedAdvisories from CISA, Mandiant, Unit 42 and Microsoft Threat Intelligence. | Only Mars Security states it |
| Publishes an open framework or specification | Not publishedNone found on the pages reviewed. | Not publishedNone found on the pages reviewed. | Neither states it |
| States MCP support | Not publishedNot stated on the pages reviewed. | Not publishedNot stated on the pages reviewed. | Neither states it |
| States a security attestation | Not publishedNot found on the pages reviewed. | StatedSOC 2, per its September 2026 announcement. | Only Mars Security states it |
| Publishes a list price | Not publishedNo list price on the pages reviewed. | Not publishedNo list price. Its intel-to-detection feature is available to all customers at no additional cost, per the September 2026 announcement. Listed on AWS Marketplace. | Neither states it |
What does each publish about pricing?
| Artemis Security | No list price on the pages reviewed. |
|---|---|
| Mars Security | No list price. Its intel-to-detection feature is available to all customers at no additional cost, per the September 2026 announcement. Listed on AWS Marketplace. |
Neither vendor publishes a list price on the pages reviewed. Ask each for a written price basis and budget separately for query compute on your data platforms.
Where does each run, and what controls does it describe?
Artemis Security
- "Hot-path data ingested, high-volume data queried where it lives."
- Ingested sources named: Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Exabeam, LogRhythm, CrowdStrike NG-SIEM.
- Queried in place: AWS Athena, AWS Security Lake, Google SecOps, BigQuery, Snowflake, Elasticsearch, ClickHouse, Trino.
- Identity: Entra ID, Okta, Auth0, JumpCloud, PingOne. EDR: CrowdStrike, Defender XDR, SentinelOne, Carbon Black, Cortex XDR. The connectors page states 225+ connectors in 17 categories.
- Response actions are staged and require human confirmation.
Mars Security
- Queries data in place: "Hunt across every log source, cloud, and endpoint without moving a byte"; no ingestion pipelines; works across existing tools without replacing them.
- Sources named: CrowdStrike Falcon, Wiz, Splunk, firewall logs, Linux Sysmon, identity providers, AWS telemetry, Snowflake and Databricks.
- Site navigation lists Slack and Microsoft Teams apps and a Splunk extension. Available on AWS Marketplace.
- Hands analysts a corroborated shortlist to confirm; rules are backtested before they go live.
- Response actions are not described on the pages reviewed.
Which should you look at first?
Look at Artemis Security first if your must-haves include response actions staged for human approval.
Look at Mars Security first if your must-haves include queries data where it already lives or new rules tested on historical data before release.
Either way, put both through the same trial questions, and try the calculator with your own must-haves.
Frequently asked questions
Is Artemis Security better than Mars Security?
Do Artemis Security and Mars Security query data in place?
Do Artemis Security and Mars Security publish pricing?
Artemis Security alternatives · Mars Security alternatives · Open this pair in the side-by-side view · Directory entry for Artemis Security · Directory entry for Mars Security