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

Microsoft ATA [EOL] vs Rapid7 InsightVM comparison

 

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

Microsoft ATA [EOL]
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rapid7 InsightVM
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (4th)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1369068 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good integration, simple to maintain, and very stable
Scalability shouldn't be a problem, at least for the size of network team that I work with. Right now we have between 400 and 500 users. This is deployed in a network that is actually about 500 users. We don't plan to increase usage. We're already using it as fully as we can and we don't have any more room. We might look at all the Microsoft programs that relate to office 365, like the ATP, because there is a difference between the ATA and the ATP. We are going to look and see whether there's any gaps that we can close. I think if you compare ATA with the actual ATP it's basically the same functionality. One is more on-premises versus the cloud. Since we are progressively in moving to the cloud, we might look at the ATP, which integrates better with the Microsoft cloud.
Anusha Sadasivani - PeerSpot reviewer
Rapid deployment and user-friendly architecture streamline vulnerability management but customer support response needs improvement
We are still using Rapid7 InsightVM I personally still use Rapid7 InsightVM. We use Rapid7 InsightVM for vulnerability scanning. It supports both agent-based and agentless scanning, which is part of our vulnerability management strategy. The agentless scan in Rapid7 InsightVM is effective and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most valuable features is the ability to report on questionable activity."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The solution works well when used with other Microsoft solutions."
"This solution is much more user-friendly than past solutions I have used."
"The solution is very user friendly and easy to manage."
"The most valuable feature for us is the different types of reporting it provides."
"The most important aspect of the solution is that it rarely gives false positives, especially compared to other products. It provides very clear reports for our IT teams to look at."
"The remediation project is a pretty effective because it allows us, as clients or countries, to choose specific assets and set limitations on them for a certain period which allows us to track and follow up on those limitations. However, when it comes to real-time monitoring and live dashboards, InsightVM doesn't quite fit the bill. It's not a real-time solution and is not instant."
"InsightVM's most valuable feature is risk scoring, a formula based on different vectors like the ease of exploitation and the availability of the machine."
"One of the most valuable features is it's graphical dashboard feature. It is quite easy to manage the widgets, and we can customize those according to our queries."
"NeXpose is a pretty good vulnerability scanner... There's a nice dashboard."
 

Cons

"There are occasions where it generates some false positives and you have to embark into figuring it out. You need to find out if it was a true alert or a false positive. It's a little bit cumbersome in that area."
"Some of the newer features are not completely there yet... For example, there's a tool that allows you to grade your overall internal security and I don't feel that it's completely accurate."
"It would be ideal if the interface allowed for more granular configurations. For example, if I were to set a rule that is a deviation from the pre-defined rules in the Microsoft product, there's conflict."
"Rapid7 could be easier to manage."
"Some difficulties with the online reporting and lack of integrations."
"There have been instances where technical support takes a long time to update the status of a ticket, which is something that can be improved."
"There are end-user needs and expectations that are being overlooked in the development that could be addressed by appointing a customer advisory board."
"Reporting could be expanded."
"In terms of improvements, its price could be better. Our main issue with Rapid7 is that it is too expensive. You can only sell it to enterprise accounts. In terms of new features, Rapid7 came up with a product called InsightIDR a couple of years ago, which is a good SIEM solution. We expect that Rapid7 will work on some sort of integration between InsightVM and InsightIDR, where vulnerability or anomaly detected by InsightVM can be reported in InsightIDR in some sort of real-time. Rapid7 doesn't patch. For example, if you have a vulnerability, some products can scan and also do the patching, but Rapid7 does not do the patching. It would be nice if it can also patch."
"The reporting has room for improvement. You cannot customize any report. If I need a specific requirement, I have to create a new report for it."
"Rapid7 InsightVM could be easier to use for those who are using it for the first time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe we are looking into new licenses. They may be called the E5. Honestly, I don't have it on top of my mind, but I think it's around seven to $10 a user per month."
"It is pretty expensive. It depends on what you consider pricey, however, if you only look at vulnerability management solutions, such as within VM or VMDR, there are, I suppose the prices are almost the same. But I believe you will discover that for yourself."
"We purchase annual licenses."
"The tool's price is neither too high nor too low. My company needs to pay 65,000 per year. There are no additional costs apart from the licensing fees attached to the solution."
"The price of the solution is less than the competitors."
"The solution is a bit more reasonably priced than other products."
"Our licensing costs are somewhere around $40,000 annually. There are no additional fees."
"Its pricing depends on the number of users per month."
"InsightVM is an expensive product, especially compared to its competitors, at around a million NOK per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) solutions are best for your needs.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How would you choose between Rapid7 InsightVM and Tenable Nessus?
You have full visibility across cloud, network, virtual, and containerized infrastructures with Rapid7 Insight VM. You can easily prioritize vulnerabilities using attacker analytics. Overall, Rapid...
What do you like most about Rapid7 InsightVM?
The product's initial setup phase was very easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 InsightVM?
The customers are mostly SMBs, though some enterprise organizations have also deployed the solution. This is neither a cheap nor the most expensive solution. Qualys and some other vendors are more ...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Advanced Threat Analytics, MS ATA [EOL]
InsightVM, NeXpose
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Turkish Airlines, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Empa, The Alberta Teachers' Association
ACS, Acosta, AllianceData, amazon.com, biogen idec, CBRE, CATERPILLAR, Deloitte, COACH, GameStop, IBM
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Exabeam, Cynet and others in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA). Updated: October 2025.
872,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.