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

Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management vs XM Cyber comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 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
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (3rd)
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
10th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Patch Management (6th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (4th), Software Supply Chain Security (5th)
XM Cyber
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Controls Monitoring (7th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (25th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.6%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of XM Cyber is 1.1%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

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.
Revathi VeeraRaghavan - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides comprehensive visibility and covers the complete attack surface
For some of the software, there was no life cycle or general information. We wanted them to give details in the database as and when the software comes. I raised a ticket for that, and after that, they updated the details for more than one million software. They should address the false positives generated in EASM. It is fetching assets that have Infosys as the keyword. They should fix that. When we click on the web application, it only shows potential web assets. The application details are not there. Overall, CSAM has matured a lot. These are the few enhancements that need to be done.
HolgerHeimann - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable with no false-positives and helpful support
There's a lot of improvement possible, however, most of it is in the details. I personally like the concept, as it's pretty straightforward and the product is not trying to overload functionality. It's a clean and straightforward approach. You know what you get. Most of the improvements are detail improvements. They're pretty open to future requests as well, so we send them a lot of suggestions. For example, at the moment, they have something called Battleground. That's a visualization of the network, and it's a visualization of the attack paths that are possible. The program uses so-called scenarios, and we say, "Okay, I'm watching traffic for maybe 24 hours," and then you get a result for that scenario, what happens in that time with what the attack paths are, et cetera. The result of the same scenario yesterday or tomorrow may be different as something might change. In that, one of the things I'm currently missing, which is on the list to be added, is some kind of diff visualization. For example, showing a two-screen split of activity. On the left side of the screen, that's how it was yesterday; on the right side, that's how it is today; and here are the differences. We'd like to see a cheaper price.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management offers valuable features such as continuous vendor support, rapid response times, dedicated vendor partnerships, and advanced technical capabilities for risk identification."
"Our favorite features are the tagging and the ability to quickly find assets in the portal."
"I appreciate the feature that simplifies cloud security posture, offering insights into vulnerabilities, and reducing the complexity of managing the security program."
"It provides most of the information needed regarding the assets, including the operating system and whether the assets are network devices or servers."
"The integration with different third-party tools, such as cloud providers like Azure and AWS, and asset management tools like CMDB systems, is valuable."
"When you implement a dynamic tag using a query, you do not need to manually tag all the servers. It categorizes all the servers that come under that query. The tagging part is automatically done within a few minutes. It reduces the effort."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management has helped to improve the organization's security posture significantly."
"I would rate Qualys CSAM a ten out of ten."
"The platform's most valuable feature is attack simulation."
"What I personally like very much, from my experience, is that it is very reliable."
 

Cons

"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."
"Some areas that would be helpful are more comprehensive tagging and the ability to set up better dynamic rules."
"It is automatically exporting the vulnerabilities and the assets. However, it would be useful to have the ability to select or to filter which we would like to export."
"One improvement that they can make in the EASM module is the scan frequency. After EASM is configured the first time, it allows you to do the complete configuration, but if you want to reconfigure it, it will not ask or provide any option for scan frequency. For that, you need to raise a case with Qualys and talk to the Qualys team."
"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."
"Qualys could improve by enhancing its dynamic tagging and role-based access control features, and by refining its user interface for a more intuitive and efficient user experience."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management could be more cost-effective by offering a lower price point or integrating with existing VMDR features."
"We have had challenges modifying the agent configuration. Particularly, when we want to change the tenant that the agent is pointing to, we have had difficulties making that reliable and working properly."
"We'd like to see a cheaper price."
"XM Cyber could identify all areas of vulnerability. They could expand the identification span for different areas."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management can be expensive, especially if we already have VMDR."
"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."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"The cost for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is high."
"The Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management pricing is well-aligned with our usage."
"Qualys offers excellent value for money."
"The pricing is market-competitive."
"We have to pay standard licensing fees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
Zafran is a new startup. Features are continuously being added or improved. 1) Continued integrations with existing (...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
We connect this to our vulnerability scanner as input, our security tools to better determine risk, and our change ma...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
The pricing is reasonable relative to the features provided, as it collects all module data and operates as a main, c...
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
The deployment is somewhat complicated and could be made more user-friendly for most users. It is currently not user-...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
We use it to identify all our assets, including those on our premises, cloud, and remote environments. It continuousl...
What do you like most about XM Cyber?
The platform's most valuable feature is attack simulation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for XM Cyber?
We have to pay standard licensing fees. There are no additional costs. It is an expensive product. I rate the pricing...
What needs improvement with XM Cyber?
XM Cyber could identify all areas of vulnerability. They could expand the identification span for different areas.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Hamburg Port Authority, Plymouth Rock Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management vs. XM Cyber and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.