We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Vulnerability Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pros →
"The integration of Tenable into our security ecosystem was very good."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution can integrate with third parties and meets standard compliance."
"It is pretty stable. I would rate it nine or maybe ten."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"The price of Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is reasonable as it is ten times cheaper than other options."
"They are on a good trajectory as a company and investing in R&D in the right ways."
"You can customize each point in new scans."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"The interface could be improved; right now it's running on two interfaces simultaneously."
"The product could be easier to set up on the cloud."
"An area of improvement for this solution is being able to customize the dashboard. For example, the dashboard does not allow us to view a previous months vulnerability results alongside current results to make comparisons."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"They need to have more dependable and faster support."
"I'd like to see them improve their support."
"The shortcoming of the solution that needs improvement is related to its capability to do vulnerability assessments on applications."
"I'm not satisfied with the reporting structure."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable Vulnerability Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 11th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Tenable Vulnerability Management is ranked 2nd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 38 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Tenable Vulnerability Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) writes "Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Vulnerability Management writes "Discovers vulnerabilities and integrates well with other solutions". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Snyk, whereas Tenable Vulnerability Management is most compared with Tenable Security Center, Tenable Nessus, Qualys VMDR, Amazon Inspector and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management.
See our list of best Risk-Based Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Risk-Based 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.