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

ESET Cloud Apps Protection vs Tenable Vulnerability Management comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

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
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
17th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (1st)
ESET Cloud Apps Protection
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
83rd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (46th), Patch Management (39th)
Tenable Vulnerability Manag...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Patch Management (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 1.0%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Cloud Apps Protection is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Vulnerability Management is 4.5%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Tenable Vulnerability Management4.5%
Zafran Security1.0%
ESET Cloud Apps Protection0.2%
Other94.3%
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
LA
Great protection, good privacy, and helpful support
The only thing I would like is a way to open the email that is going to quarantine. Based on the level of security, they cannot open the email to check the message. Even for the administrator, you have to create a security copy to be sent, which will lock the log support. It's not easy for an admin to check and decide if the email is good or not. That is the only thing that I'm seeing could be improved. Basically, ESET doesn't have the ability to let the administrator release an email showing the message on the email. It's not possible. If you want to have an email review, you have to select an option to send a copy. In the way that they designed the system, for security, they are not letting anyone even have the admin privileges to make this happen. Privacy is at a really high level.
Chethan Gowda - PeerSpot reviewer
Have maintained accurate vulnerability scans and gained actionable remediation insights across thousands of servers
Tenable Vulnerability Management agents are very lightweight, and the results we get are very accurate. The solutions they provide to us, assuming if one vulnerability exists, there will be a solution. The resolution they give us in wording will be the best solution. The exploit rates and the reports we get provide a lot of information, making it very easy for us to verify.The main benefit of integration with Tenable Vulnerability Management is that there will be no lack of missing vulnerabilities when it comes to the patching environment. That is one of the key aspects of why we have integrated Tenable to our patching tools. It has a vast capacity of pushing the data to our tools due to its capability and compatibility. That is also one of the reasons why we are using Tenable Vulnerability Management.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Overall, we have seen about eighty-seven percent reduction of the number of vulnerabilities that require urgency to remediate, specifically the number of criticals."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We are close to having 99% or 98% detection."
"The most valuable features are the precision of detection and the level of customization of the policy."
"The solution's most valuable feature is providing a single pane of visibility on all the infrastructure and its status."
"The ease of use in terms of scanning assets is valuable."
"The price of Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is reasonable as it is ten times cheaper than other options."
"The initial setup is mostly straightforward."
"A new user can easily understand the workflow, even if they are creating users for other divisions and the user is a beginner."
"The tool has an easy-to-use interface."
"It is a very, very user-friendly tool...The setup is easy"
"The vulnerability scanning is the most important aspect of the solution for us."
 

Cons

"I think the ability to have some enhanced reporting capabilities is something they can improve on, as they have good reports but we have asked for some specific reporting enhancements."
"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"The specific domain file for Apache needs to be well-defined."
"It's not easy for an admin to check and decide if the email is good or not."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management could be improved with an increased number of dashboards and MSSP integration."
"The solution seems to focus too much on enterprises, and they really need a product that works for SMBs."
"t needs additional reporting and intelligence features, as well as enhancements in AI-driven detection, which is still in its early stages."
"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."
"More flexibility is required compared to other solutions."
"There needs to be better dashboard navigation."
"It would be helpful if Tenable could be more clear with regard to everything the solution can and cannot do with the particular license that you have."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution provides affordable pricing for medium sized industries."
"A yearly payment has to be made toward the solution's licensing costs."
"The total cost we pay for this solution is over 45K. This is for a large education organization."
"The tool is reasonably priced."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high price, I rate the pricing an eight. So, it is a pretty expensive solution."
"Tenable.io is not known for being a cheap product."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management's pricing solution model isn't great."
"There are additional features that can be licensed for an additional cost."
"Compared to other VM solutions, Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Media Company
7%
Consumer Goods Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise21
 

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...
What do you like most about ESET Mail Security?
The most valuable features are the precision of detection and the level of customization of the policy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Mail Security?
The solution provides affordable pricing for medium sized industries.
What needs improvement with ESET Mail Security?
The specific domain file for Apache needs to be well-defined.
What's the difference between Tenable Nessus and Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
Tenable Nessus is a vulnerability assessment solution that is both easy to deploy and easy to manage. The design of ...
What needs improvement with Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
I don't think I have any additional features to add for improvement, as Tenable Vulnerability Management does a prett...
 

Also Known As

No data available
ESET Mail Security
Tenable.io
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Global Payments AU/NZ
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Cloud Apps Protection vs. Tenable Vulnerability Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.