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

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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
18th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (3rd)
IBM Guardium Vulnerability ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
48th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Patch Management (4th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (2nd), Software Supply Chain Security (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 1.1%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is 1.3%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management1.3%
Zafran Security1.1%
IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment0.7%
Other96.9%
Vulnerability Management
 

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.
SL
Guardium Administrator at Interactive Group
Improvements sought in database optimization while benefiting from robust security monitoring
We use the analytical functionality of Guardium, but the analytical functionality is not so powerful or flexible because it does not include the application user ID. It only includes the database user ID. To identify risky users, it does not support end users, so IBM must incorporate this feature into the built-in analytical engine of the Guardium. There is only one problem I experienced while using Guardium: the internal database of the collector is MySQL, which is not so powerful or flexible. When you make a query in a MySQL database, it takes too much time to respond. IBM should replace this MySQL database with a more powerful internal database for the logging mechanism so that Guardium can collect logging data flexibly and ensure optimization. My overall experience with Guardium is good. The only problem is that IBM must replace the internal DB, MySQL, with a more powerful enterprise-level database because enterprises use it at an enterprise level, and MySQL does not support optimally.
Nicki Møller - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Enables automation and quick access to necessary information
One of the significant challenges Qualys is discovery, which I know Microsoft excels at. I can't recall how well Qualys performs this function; it seems I might be missing some details. However, if there's one key aspect to focus on, it's discovery—the ability to identify assets that you are not aware of, even when you can see they are present. Understanding what those assets are is crucial. With Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, it was very difficult to extract detections from the system. The features within Qualys are limited to what they have developed. Sometimes a complete overview is needed to push to a Power BI dashboard, Splunk, ServiceNow, or other platforms. The export process is incredibly challenging. We needed a developer to write a hundred-line Python script that would loop over certain assets due to export limitations. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management could improve its integration capabilities. While it generates substantial data, correlating it with other data sources can be challenging. The export process is difficult, and pre-built integrations with other tools could be enhanced for better process implementation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"With Zafran Security, it integrates with your security controls, allowing you to take that risk score and reduce it based on the controls in place or increase the risk based on different factors, such as if the issue is internet reachable or if there's an exploit in the wild."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"The Vulnerability Assessment feature is quite stable and helps identify numerous vulnerabilities in databases."
"It helped with some of the regulatory requirements. It also helped with some of the security analytics and analysis. It was worthwhile from that perspective."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides a simple English recommendation on actions that you need to take once a vulnerability is discovered."
"The reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."
"The support is extremely helpful, deserving a 10 out of 10 rating."
"Our favorite features are the tagging and the ability to quickly find assets in the portal."
"I would rate Qualys CSAM a ten out of ten."
"The asset management part is very simple and essential, and Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management was particularly effective because the information was available exactly where needed, enabling automation and quick access to necessary answers."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management has helped to improve the organization's security posture significantly."
"I would rate Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management ten out of ten."
"Overall, I would give Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management a nine out of ten."
"I appreciate the feature that simplifies cloud security posture, offering insights into vulnerabilities, and reducing the complexity of managing the security program."
 

Cons

"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"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 interface could be improved by having sub-groups of tests, ultimately making the process of collecting tests faster."
"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."
"It was not as easy to use. The user-friendliness of it was somewhat lower than what I was expecting. It was also lacking in terms of the ease of the setup. There should be an automatic agent for deployment."
"There is only one problem I experienced while using Guardium: the internal database of the collector is MySQL, which is not so powerful or flexible."
"Some areas that would be helpful are more comprehensive tagging and the ability to set up better dynamic rules."
"We encountered some false positives, which required coordination with the IT team for verification."
"Based on the company's budget, Qualys offers limited features, which can also be utilized in other environments."
"The UI needs improvement as it can become overwhelming after prolonged use."
"There have been a couple of times where Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management wasn't accessible and I'd reach out to our TAM and they'd say, 'Qualys is down.' They say, 'We'll let you know when it's back up.' Of course, they never let you know when it's back up."
"The Qualys CAPS service requires further exploration and improvement, particularly in its handling of protocols and reactivity with MAC and IP addresses for CAP agents."
"The UI and menu navigation has improved significantly, however, the menus could still be clunky, making navigation within the assets challenging."
"The UI and menu navigation has improved significantly, however, the menus could still be clunky, making navigation within the assets challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"One thing not advantageous for it was that it was a little bit more expensive. I would rate it one out of five in terms of pricing."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"Though the solution is considered expensive, if bundled with other services such as VMDR or cloud agents, its value would significantly increase. It is currently a bit costly, but with bundling, it could become attractive to more customers."
"Qualys is competitively priced for its features. Its pricing is suitable for large organizations with more than 4,000 assets, but for smaller organizations with few assets, such as banks, the costs might be high. They should come up with packages that are suitable for small organizations."
"The pricing is fair. I would love to see the price come down a little bit, but we do get a lot of value out of it. We are squeezing every ounce of value we can out of the tool."
"The pricing is market-competitive."
"The pricing is reasonable relative to the features provided, as it collects all module data and operates as a main, centralized inventory, making it a cost-effective solution."
"The pricing for Qualys CSAM is nominal."
"The pricing for Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management is reasonable, with an annual subscription costing around $1,000 per year or a monthly subscription starting at approximately $72 per month, depending on the specific package and features included."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
879,672 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
37%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Performing Arts
6%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise23
 

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 needs improvement with IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment?
We use the analytical functionality of Guardium, but the analytical functionality is not so powerful or flexible beca...
What is your primary use case for IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment?
We are still using IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment. We only use IBM Guardium Data Protection and monitoring, da...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment?
We do not use IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment for data encryption or any other tool for analytics, or identity ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
We purchased it through a reseller and the pricing was reasonable. We received Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management ...
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
The TruRisk feature could help prioritize vulnerabilities and assets, but our issue currently is that we weren't prov...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
My use cases involve using Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management to detect vulnerabilities and then passing on the in...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,672 professionals have used our research since 2012.