We compared Tenable Nessus and Pentera based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Tenable Nessus is praised for its vulnerability scanning capabilities, customer service, reasonable pricing, and value in improving cybersecurity. On the other hand, Pentera stands out for its security testing capabilities, user-friendly interface, efficient vulnerability tracking, and positive return on investment. Areas for improvement include user interface, system stability, performance, and customer support.
Features: Tenable Nessus is valued for its comprehensive vulnerability scanning and prioritization capabilities, while Pentera is praised for its extensive range of security tests and efficient vulnerability tracking and reporting system.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost of Tenable Nessus is praised for being relatively low and the licensing process is straightforward, according to user feedback. On the other hand, the cost, setup, and licensing of Pentera have been discussed by customers, with opinions shared about pricing, initial investment, and license agreement., The Tenable Nessus product has received positive feedback regarding its effectiveness, reliability, and ease of use, providing value in terms of ROI. Users also appreciated its comprehensive reporting features. On the other hand, Pentera users expressed satisfaction and benefit from their experience with the product, indicating a positive ROI.
Room for Improvement: The room for improvement in Tenable Nessus includes user feedback on areas that need to be addressed. On the other hand, Pentera has areas to improve such as enhancing the user interface, improving system stability, increasing platform performance, and enhancing customer support and documentation.
Deployment and customer support: Tenable Nessus and Pentera both have users mentioning spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup. However, Pentera also has users mentioning a week for deployment and another week for setup, indicating a potentially faster implementation process compared to Tenable Nessus., The customer service for Tenable Nessus is highly regarded, with users praising the effectiveness and responsiveness of the support team. On the other hand, customers of Pentera appreciate the helpful and responsive assistance they have received from the company.
The summary above is based on 41 interviews we conducted recently with Tenable Nessus and Pentera users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The product is easy to use."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"Overall Zoom is a good solution."
"The most valuable feature is the breadth of vulnerabilities that it finds. It's able to find across a lot of different platforms and operating systems. It's also able to combine local testing with network-based testing."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the dashboard. They are convenient to use."
"I like this solution because it is complete. It can scan and check many types of vulnerabilities. It can also check for compliance."
"It does exactly what you expect it to do, and its pricing is great. We couldn't really ask for a better deal."
"Security is the key number because it can start to scan with a few clicks instead of credits, which is a bit complicated. So simplicity is the first advantage. Then the generated reports are well done and easy to present to management. The quality of the scan is quite good in detecting the severity. The solution has simplicity. Also, it has frequent updates so that is also a valuable feature."
"The reports are pretty nice and easy to understand."
"The most valuable feature is the installation of Tenable which is incredibly easy."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The price could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."
"The tool needs to upgrade asset tracking."
"The reporting feature needs to be improved."
"Tenable Nessus could improve by having more steady updates which will reduce the vulnerabilities."
"The price could be reduced."
"We use credentialed scans. They need more permissions and more changes or settings on Windows and Linux."
"The report for counters is too simple and would be improved by a dashboard."
"EQA's and dashboards should be addressed in the next release."
"Remediation needs improvement."
Pentera is ranked 14th in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews. Pentera is rated 8.2, while Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Pentera writes "A stable solution that can be used to do continuous and automated vulnerability assessments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". Pentera is most compared with Cymulate, Horizon3.ai, Picus Security, Qualys VMDR and XM Cyber, whereas Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management. See our Pentera vs. Tenable Nessus report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.