Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ArmorCode vs Nucleus comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (18th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (3rd)
ArmorCode
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (38th), DevSecOps (14th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (23rd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (13th)
Nucleus
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (35th), Vulnerability Management (49th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (19th)
 

Featured Reviews

Reviewer6233 - PeerSpot reviewer
Works at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal
While Zafran Security is already a powerful tool, there are areas where it could be further improved to provide even greater value. One key area for enhancement is the searching capabilities within its vulnerabilities module. By incorporating the ability to create Boolean searches, users would gain the ability to apply more complex filters and customize their search criteria. This would greatly enhance the precision and efficiency with which security teams can identify and prioritize vulnerabilities. Having such tailored search capabilities would save time and resources by narrowing down vast lists of vulnerabilities to those that meet specific parameters relevant to our unique risk environment. Additionally, integrating more robust reporting and visualization tools would be advantageous. Enhanced dashboards that offer customizable visual representations of risk configurations and threat landscapes would facilitate better communication with stakeholders, making it easier to explain vulnerabilities and the rationale behind certain security measures. This would also aid in demonstrating the improvements and value derived from existing security investments to leadership and non-technical team members.
Use ArmorCode?
Leave a review
Use Nucleus?
Leave a review
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Educational Organization
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
Since we stood Zafran Security up in our private cloud, we handle the maintenance on our side. As we opted not to use...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
In terms of areas for improvement, Zafran Security is doing a really great job as a new and emerging company. Oftenti...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
My use cases for Zafran Security revolve around two primary areas. One is around vulnerability management and priorit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
ArmorCode AppSecOps Platform
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Shutterfly, S&P Global, Snap Finance, Snapdocs, and The Access Group
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: November 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.