Straight answer
For this site's question, Nebulock has the higher weighted figure, 4.34 of 5 to Vega's 3.35. Nebulock is stronger on intel-to-detection speed, continuous hunting, rule lifecycle, data reach without new ingestion and time to first value; Vega is stronger on coverage measurement against ATT&CK; they are level on buyer transparency.
Nebulock
4.34 / 5
Stronger on
- Intel to detection
- Continuous hunting
- Rule lifecycle
- Data reach
- Time to first value
Vega
3.35 / 5
Stronger on
- ATT&CK coverage
Criterion by criterion
Nebulock stronger on 5, Vega stronger on 1, level on 1.
Intel to detection weight 20%
Nebulock is stronger
Nebulock 5 / 5Vega 3 / 5
Nebulock: The vendor states its Vespyr agent turns a threat intel report into a deployable detection in minutes, with intel from CrowdStrike, Mandiant, MISP and community feeds.
Vega: Hunt findings can be promoted to MITRE-mapped detections on the spot; an intelligence-to-detection workflow is not described.
Continuous hunting weight 20%
Nebulock is stronger
Nebulock 5 / 5Vega 4 / 5
Nebulock: Built to hunt continuously; hunts run without a directive and follow the published four-stage LOCK framework.
Vega: Given a hypothesis, it runs the whole hunt across sources on its own and shows each step; a continuous schedule is not stated.
ATT&CK coverage weight 8%
Vega is stronger
Nebulock 3 / 5Vega 4 / 5
Nebulock: Hypotheses map to ATT&CK and the docs reference a MITRE Coverage feature; public pages do not show how coverage is measured.
Vega: A security assessment shows real ATT&CK coverage and the gaps.
Rule lifecycle weight 7%
Nebulock is stronger
Nebulock 5 / 5Vega 4 / 5
Nebulock: Every rule must pass a retrohunt before deployment, with immutable version history, compare and revert, and GitHub export.
Vega: Detections live in source control and every change has a diff, an author and an approver; pre-deployment testing is not described.
Data reach weight 25%
Nebulock is stronger
Nebulock 4 / 5Vega 3 / 5
Nebulock: Federated search fetches data just in time; docs name EDR, identity and cloud sources plus Microsoft Sentinel, with fewer data lakes named than Mars Security or Anvilogic.
Vega: Queries every source in place with no migration or ingestion, but its connectors page names no platforms.
Transparency weight 5%
Level
Nebulock 3 / 5Vega 3 / 5
Nebulock: No public price, but a public documentation site and MIT-licensed frameworks on GitHub.
Vega: No public price; a public sandbox lets a buyer try the product before a sales call.
Time to first value weight 15%
Nebulock is stronger
Nebulock 4 / 5Vega 3 / 5
Nebulock: SaaS with documented integrations; no published time-to-value figure.
Vega: Queries data in place; public pages do not name connectors or describe deployment.
Editorial assessment, 1 to 5 per criterion, from public vendor material. It measures fit for turning threat intelligence into hunts and detections on data a team already has. It is not a measure of overall product quality.
Where is Nebulock stronger?
- Intel-to-detection speed (Nebulock 5 / 5, Vega 3 / 5): The vendor states its Vespyr agent turns a threat intel report into a deployable detection in minutes, with intel from CrowdStrike, Mandiant, MISP and community feeds.
- Continuous hunting (Nebulock 5 / 5, Vega 4 / 5): Built to hunt continuously; hunts run without a directive and follow the published four-stage LOCK framework.
- Rule lifecycle (Nebulock 5 / 5, Vega 4 / 5): Every rule must pass a retrohunt before deployment, with immutable version history, compare and revert, and GitHub export.
- Data reach without new ingestion (Nebulock 4 / 5, Vega 3 / 5): Federated search fetches data just in time; docs name EDR, identity and cloud sources plus Microsoft Sentinel, with fewer data lakes named than Mars Security or Anvilogic.
- Time to first value (Nebulock 4 / 5, Vega 3 / 5): SaaS with documented integrations; no published time-to-value figure.
Where is Vega stronger?
- Coverage measurement against ATT&CK (Vega 4 / 5, Nebulock 3 / 5): A security assessment shows real ATT&CK coverage and the gaps.
Which should you choose?
Choose Nebulock if
- New threat intelligence has to become a tested, deployable detection quickly.Nebulock scores 5 of 5: The vendor states its Vespyr agent turns a threat intel report into a deployable detection in minutes, with intel from CrowdStrike, Mandiant, MISP and community feeds.
- You want to hunt across the SIEM, EDR, identity, cloud and data-lake platforms you already run, without a new ingestion pipeline.Nebulock scores 4 of 5: Federated search fetches data just in time; docs name EDR, identity and cloud sources plus Microsoft Sentinel, with fewer data lakes named than Mars Security or Anvilogic.
Choose Vega if
- You need to show coverage against MITRE ATT&CK from the tool itself.Vega scores 4 of 5: A security assessment shows real ATT&CK coverage and the gaps.
- You want hunts to run on their own, from intelligence or hypotheses, without an analyst starting each one.Vega scores 4 of 5: Given a hypothesis, it runs the whole hunt across sources on its own and shows each step; a continuous schedule is not stated.
What does each vendor publish, including pricing?
| Deployment | SaaS |
|---|---|
| Focus (docs) | Endpoint and identity-based threats such as credential theft, privilege escalation and lateral movement |
| Integrations (docs) | Okta, Microsoft Entra, Duo, CrowdStrike, Microsoft Defender, SentinelOne, AWS CloudTrail, Microsoft Event Hub, Microsoft Sentinel, Jamf, Slack, Microsoft Teams, Tines, Jira, GitHub |
| Rule lifecycle | Retrohunt required before deployment; immutable version history; GitHub export |
| Open source | Agentic Threat Hunting Framework and Agentic Detection Engineering Framework (MIT license) |
| Pricing | Not published |
Source: nebulock.io · nebulock.io · docs.nebulock.io · docs.nebulock.io · github.com · Reviewed Sep 2026
| Offices | Tel Aviv and New York |
|---|---|
| Data | Federated analytics, no migration, ingestion or egress; connectors not named on the public connectors page |
| ATT&CK | Security assessment shows ATT&CK coverage and gaps; hunt findings become MITRE-mapped detections |
| Rule lifecycle | Source control; every change has a diff, an author and an approver |
| Try before buying | Public sandbox (sandbox.vega.io) |
| Pricing | Not published |
Source: vega.io · vega.io · vega.io · vega.io · vega.io · Reviewed Sep 2026
Editorial assessment · Desk research from public vendor material, last reviewed September 2026
Questions about Nebulock and Vega
Is Nebulock or Vega the better fit for hunting on existing data?
On this site's weights, Nebulock has the higher weighted figure, 4.34 to 3.35. Nebulock is stronger on 5 criteria, Vega on 1, and they are level on 1. If the rows where Vega is stronger matter most to your team, it may be the better fit.
Where are Nebulock and Vega level?
They score the same on buyer transparency. (Transparency: 3 of 5 each)
Do Nebulock or Vega publish pricing?
Neither publishes a license price. On buyer transparency Nebulock scores 3 of 5 (No public price, but a public documentation site and MIT-licensed frameworks on GitHub) and Vega scores 3 of 5 (No public price; a public sandbox lets a buyer try the product before a sales call).