We performed a comparison between Tenable Nessus and Acunetix based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Tenable Nessus comes out ahead of Acunetix. Even though both solutions offer beneficial vulnerability scanning and a proactive approach, Acunetix’s two-year licensing plan is less flexible than that of its competitor, and its need for manual resolution of false positives leaves room for improvement.
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the self-updating engine."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the GUI and user-friendliness. Additionally, the environment is easy to work with."
"It gives a holistic view of your entire environment."
"It's scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the dashboard. They are convenient to use."
"User friendly and good dashboards."
"Easy to set up vulnerability scanner with good stability and a responsive technical support team."
"Ease of reviewing scores, identifying vulnerabilities, and getting information on them."
"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say its reporting portion."
"There is room for improvement in finishing the transition to the cloud. We'd like to see them keep on improving the Tenable.io product, so that we can migrate to it entirely, instead of having to keep the Tenable.sc on-prem product."
"Tenable Nessus could improve reporting and information sharing. It would be helpful if we could share the reports and have a little bit better flexibility in the reporting of the data."
"The reporting could be improved. The reporting in Rapid7 is much better."
"They should try to create an all-in-one solution."
"The reports should be improved in Tenable Nessus. For example, when you are auditing compliance with CIS standards. It provides very poor reports."
"We have had some false positives in the past, which we hope can improve in the future."
"They could make their reporting a little better."
Acunetix is ranked 14th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Checkmarx One, whereas Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Snyk. See our Acunetix vs. Tenable Nessus report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.