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

Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management 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)
Microsoft Defender Vulnerab...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (18th), Microsoft Security Suite (19th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (6th)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
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 Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is 2.1%, down from 3.0% 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%
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management2.1%
Zafran Security1.1%
Other95.5%
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.
OB
Microsoft Solutions Manager at Self-Employed
Ensures strong threat and vulnerability management with continuous risk assessment
The major priority is identity, which is crucial; we have lots of companies in manufacturing, energy, or various sectors, and it varies from one to another. I assess Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management as very effective in continuously assessing vulnerabilities without requiring scans. We use automatic investigation and remediation features, safe attachments, safe links, and real-time reports, which are also very effective. For Active Directory, Defender has threat intelligence, and we are using that. The risk-based prioritization within Vulnerability Management affects my ability to manage vulnerabilities, particularly in relation to the Zero Trust Model utilized by our customers. The end-users often do as they please in their systems.
AN
Cyber Security Specialist at UBS Financial
Customized dashboards and quick deployment support comprehensive asset management
We use the True Risk Score for vulnerability prioritization, though we do not solely rely upon it since some assets may be decommissioned soon or not in use. From Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, we primarily focus on internet-facing assets. We have created separate tasks for internet-facing assets and track the True Risk dashboard specifically for these assets. If the True Risk Score is higher for any internet-facing assets, then we take action accordingly. The True Risk Score is very helpful for prioritization. The initial setup was straightforward and easy. We needed to create customized tags, group them twice, and validate whether the operating system detection was true positive or false positive. We encountered some false positives, which required coordination with the IT team for verification. In six months, we had approximately 20-25 machines that needed verification on a weekly basis. We coordinated with the IT team to identify the exact operating system specifications.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"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."
"The integration with Sentinel has been one of the most valuable features for my organization."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"The product's stability is very high...The scalability of the product is amazing."
"One valuable feature is the Microsoft Security Scorecard."
"Overall, I would rate Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management a nine out of ten."
"A valuable feature is the ease of management and integration with Microsoft products."
"The recommendations, scores, and steps to remediate actions are highly useful."
"The main advantage of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is that it can locate and prevent most threats even when the endpoints are not connected to the corporate network, as long as the internet is available."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time visibility Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management provides into all assets across our development and operational environments."
"Authorized and unauthorized software visibility is the best feature for me."
"The best feature is asset discovery through their cloud agent or IP-based scanning."
"Authorized and unauthorized software visibility is the best feature for me. It helps me understand security controls on our network and where we lack visibility. With a single security tool, we are able to get an extensive list."
"I mainly appreciate Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management for its patch management capabilities, which are essential in my job for deploying patches and remediating vulnerabilities."
"I would rate Qualys CSAM a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of Qualys CSAM include the ability to manage authorized and unauthorized applications efficiently. This feature helps in validating applications and maintaining a secure environment."
"We have a diverse organization with a robust infrastructure of more than 300,000 assets. By creating unauthorized lists and rules in the Qualys CSAM module, I can block certain software from being used in the organization."
 

Cons

"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"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."
"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."
"They may need to improve the portal refresh rate for Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management because it takes time for recommendations to disappear after mitigation; sometimes, it takes one week, when it should ideally take only one to two hours."
"Probably my only criticism would be the cost. It is expensive."
"The worst aspect is the refresh rate of the dashboard. A vulnerability I patch within 15 minutes takes 24 additional hours for an update."
"Sometimes the stability of the agents could be improved."
"The product is not stable; it is very resource-intensive, consuming a lot of memory and CPU, which makes it slow."
"It is challenging to extract and customize reports from the system."
"There should be risk scoring added to Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management; specifically, they call it quantification of the risk."
"The worst aspect is the refresh rate of the dashboard."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is moderately good, while Rapid7 is slightly much better."
"Some areas that would be helpful are more comprehensive tagging and the ability to set up better dynamic rules."
"They should address the false positives generated in EASM. It is fetching assets that have Infosys as the keyword. They should fix that."
"The only minor issue is occasionally being redirected to multiple teams, causing slight delays."
"The deployment is somewhat complicated and could be made more user-friendly for most users. It is currently not user-friendly for all users. It is good but can be improved. It is a new product, and they are working on it."
"There can be further simplification to reduce the overall noise and provide ESAM-related data."
"Some areas that would be helpful are more comprehensive tagging and the ability to set up better dynamic rules."
"We've received very poor guidance from them, especially after learning several things we need to fix during the Qualys conference."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the product's price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price."
"The product’s pricing is medium."
"The tool is a bit costly."
"The licensing model follows a per-user per-month structure."
"The licensing costs are reasonable."
"The Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management pricing is well-aligned with our usage."
"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 CyberSecurity Asset Management can be expensive, especially if we already have VMDR."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"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 market-competitive."
"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 cost for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
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 Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management?
The documentation from Microsoft needs significant improvement. The documents are disorganized, with one document lin...
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I think the one thing Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management can do better is the package management and the updating ...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I primarily use it for a small, single-site, multi-source setup with multi-WAN inputs. I have a main fiber connection...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.