HEAD TO HEAD

Cyberbit vs TryHackMe: which crisis simulation platform fits your team?

THE SHORT ANSWER

On our published weights TryHackMe scores 5.95 and Cyberbit 5.90. Cyberbit scores higher on scenario realism and executive and board focus; TryHackMe scores higher on exercise delivery effort, regulatory evidence, customisation and pricing clarity; they tie on measurement and after-action reporting.

By The Exercise Desk · Crisis Simulation Ranked · Published 2026-10-11

Desk research from public vendor pages, vendor announcements and standards documents read between 27 September and 13 October 2026. Editorial assessment; we did not run any exercise on these platforms.

How do Cyberbit and TryHackMe score on each criterion?

Cyberbit and TryHackMe: crisis readiness score (editorial assessment, 0 to 10)
Criterion	Weight	Cyberbit	TryHackMe	Higher score
Scenario realism	20%	Nonlinear exercises in which each answer changes the next step and SOC escalations trigger executive decisions. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Built from industry, attack vector and tech stack, with injects the team can edit or re-prompt; adaptation to each decision is not described. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	Cyberbit
Executive and board focus	20%	Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Aimed at managers, practitioners and security leaders; the boardroom is not the focus. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	Cyberbit
Exercise delivery effort	15%	Sold only as an add-on to a Cyberbit Readiness plan, so the executive exercise arrives with a range programme. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	The vendor states a 10-minute average launch, with unlimited exercises and participants. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	TryHackMe
Measurement and after-action reporting	15%	A shared dashboard scores decision impact on continuity, reputation and response. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	"Audit-ready reports" with performance insights. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	Tie
Regulatory evidence	10%	References NIST and the CREW framework; no regulatory reporting is described. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Scenarios align to NIST and ISO 27035. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	TryHackMe
Customisation	10%	How scenarios are authored or tailored is not described on the pages reviewed. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Industry, attack vector and stack inputs, Co-Create, editable injects and upload of the team's own IR playbooks. Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026	TryHackMe
Pricing clarity	10%	No price published. Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026	Individual plans are published; business plans with tabletop exercises go through sales. Source: TryHackMe pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026	TryHackMe
Total	100%			TryHackMe

Which stages of an exercise does each cover?

Build: Not described
How a scenario is authored or tailored is not described on the pages reviewed.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Adapt: Documented
Exercises can be linear or nonlinear; in nonlinear mode each answer changes what comes next, and technical escalations trigger executive decisions.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Seats: Documented
Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Run: Not described
Facilitation is not described on the pages reviewed.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Report: Partial
A shared dashboard scores the impact of decisions on continuity, reputation and response.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026
Map: Partial
The page references NIST and the CREW framework.
Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

A solid segment means the vendor's own pages describe that stage. It shows coverage, not quality; the scores judge quality.

Build: Documented
Scenarios generated from industry, attack vector and tech stack; teams can upload their own IR playbooks and co-create.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026
Adapt: Partial
Facilitators can edit injects or re-prompt; branching on each player decision is not described.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026
Seats: Partial
Aimed at managers, practitioners and security leaders rather than the boardroom.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026
Run: Not described
Who facilitates a session is not described; the vendor states a 10-minute average launch.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026
Report: Documented
"Audit-ready reports" with performance insights.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026
Map: Documented
Scenarios align to NIST and ISO 27035.
Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026

A solid segment means the vendor's own pages describe that stage. It shows coverage, not quality; the scores judge quality.

Cyberbit documents 2 of 6 stages and TryHackMe documents 3 of 6.

What do they cost?

Cyberbit

Packaging: Crisis Sim 360 is "only offered as an add-on" to a Cyberbit Readiness plan.

Not published No prices published; the pricing URL returned a 404 when we checked.

Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

TryHackMe

Packaging: Part of TryHackMe for business; business pricing through sales.

Not published Individual plans are priced publicly; business plans, which include tabletop exercises, are not.

Source: TryHackMe pricing · Read 27 Sep 2026

Which frameworks do they map results to?

Cyberbit

NIST
CREW framework

Source: Cyberbit: Crisis Sim 360 · Read 27 Sep 2026

TryHackMe

NIST
ISO 27035

Source: TryHackMe: tabletop exercises · Read 27 Sep 2026

Which should you choose?

Choose Cyberbit if

Executive and board focus: 8 / 10, Executive, legal, communications, risk and SOC teams in one connected exercise.
Scenario realism: 7 / 10, Nonlinear exercises in which each answer changes the next step and SOC escalations trigger executive decisions.
Linking a cyber range to executive decisions

Choose TryHackMe if

Customisation: 9 / 10, Industry, attack vector and stack inputs, Co-Create, editable injects and upload of the team's own IR playbooks.
Exercise delivery effort: 8 / 10, The vendor states a 10-minute average launch, with unlimited exercises and participants.
Fast, security-team tabletops from a large training platform

Cyberbit profile TryHackMe profile Alternatives to Cyberbit Alternatives to TryHackMe See them side by side

Frequently asked questions

Is Cyberbit or TryHackMe better for executive crisis exercises?

Cyberbit scores higher on executive and board focus (8 against 4 out of 10). Read each profile for the detail.

Which is easier to run, Cyberbit or TryHackMe?

TryHackMe scores higher on delivery effort, where a higher score means less effort, (8 against 5 out of 10). Read each profile for the detail.

Do Cyberbit and TryHackMe publish prices?

Neither Cyberbit nor TryHackMe publishes a price for its exercise product.