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

Nucleus vs Qualys Web Application Scanning 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

Nucleus
Ranking in Application Security Tools
35th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (48th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (19th)
Qualys Web Application Scan...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
13th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Nucleus is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys Web Application Scanning is 2.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Qualys Web Application Scanning2.0%
Nucleus0.5%
Other97.5%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Use Nucleus?
Share your opinion
AnkitSharma13 - PeerSpot reviewer
Web scanning needs improvement but offers good vulnerability detection
The downside of Qualys Web Application Scanning is that it cannot crawl automatically. If I provide an IP address and a login form, it does basic testing, but it doesn't go deep as IBM AppScan does. If Qualys Web Application Scanning could improve its crawling capability, it would be more user-friendly. Qualys Web Application Scanning does IP-level testing, requiring direct input of credentials, and can only scan a few pages to provide known generic vulnerabilities, which isn't as beneficial from my point of view. The Vulnerability Management also relies heavily on version numbers and will flag vulnerabilities based on the component version, but it doesn't check if a real fix exists, leading to flags on components that actually have workarounds available.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Qualys Web Application Scanning?
The vulnerability management feature is a strong one. And also the patch management feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys Web Application Scanning?
Regarding pricing, I think for personal use, it is costly, but if organizations are ready to pay, then it is fine as they are using it.
What needs improvement with Qualys Web Application Scanning?
The downside of Qualys Web Application Scanning is that it cannot crawl automatically. If I provide an IP address and a login form, it does basic testing, but it doesn't go deep as IBM AppScan does...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Qualys WAS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
BskyB, Cartagena, ClearPoint Learning Systems, Connect Group, du, Fortrex Technologies, HBOR, HDI, Highlights for Children, The Lithuanian State Enterprise Centre of Registers, City of Miami Beach, Microsoft, MidlandHR, MSCI Inc., Northern Arizona University, Ofgem, Olympus Europa, PhoneFactor, RTL Nederland, ThousandEyes, VGZ Organisatie B.V.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: August 2025.
867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.