Metta vs Filigran OpenAEV: 2026 Comparison
Metta is a free threat simulation tool. Filigran OpenAEV is a commercial threat simulation tool by Filigran. Compare features, ratings, integrations, and community reviews side by side to find the best threat simulation fit for your security stack.
CST VerdictBased on our analysis of NIST CSF 2.0 coverage, core features, integrations, company size fit, here is our conclusion:
Security teams building an adversarial simulation program on a shoestring budget should start with Metta; it's free and open-source, so you can deploy it immediately without procurement overhead or vendor lock-in. The 1,133 GitHub stars and active community mean you're not betting on abandoned code. Skip Metta if you need polished UI, commercial support, or pre-built scenarios for compliance frameworks; this is a DIY tool that demands engineering resources to customize and operationalize.
Mid-market and enterprise teams with mature EDR deployments will get the most from Filigran OpenAEV because it validates whether your existing detection stack actually catches real attacks instead of just assuming coverage. The platform's MITRE ATT&CK-aligned simulation library and AI-assisted scenario creation mean you're testing threats your environment actually faces, not generic templates, and the agentless architecture lets you start validating immediately without EDR replacement costs. Skip this if you need a turnkey solution that works without an EDR already in place; OpenAEV assumes you own the detection layer and want to stress-test it.
