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

Loginsoft Cybersecurity Services vs ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 22, 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) (2nd)
Loginsoft Cybersecurity Ser...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
123rd
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Configuration Management (39th), Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP) (76th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (41st)
ManageEngine Vulnerability ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
27th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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.
Use Loginsoft Cybersecurity Services?
Share your opinion
MB
Enhanced endpoint security with effective patch management and frequent scans
The most valuable feature was the patch management, which was very effective for endpoint-centric solutions requiring remediation of vulnerabilities. ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus was the perfect fit for managing these requirements. We improved the number of scans and patches performed from four times per year per computer to four times per month.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
862,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
No data available
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
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?
The current pricing of Zafran Security is fair overall. They were good to work with to accommodate our organization w...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvement...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Zafran Security is helping reduce the amount of critical vulnerabilities in our environments that require prompt reme...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus?
The solution helps us figure out vulnerabilities and fix them.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus?
ManageEngine is considered an affordable solution, offering competitive pricing compared to similar solutions like Ut...
What needs improvement with ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus?
The integration with third-party solutions such as ticketing solutions or CMDB solutions can be improved. The asset d...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Wiz, Tenable and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: July 2025.
862,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.