We performed a comparison between IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment and Tenable Nessus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that it provides a simple English recommendation on actions that you need to take once a vulnerability is discovered."
"It helped with some of the regulatory requirements. It also helped with some of the security analytics and analysis. It was worthwhile from that perspective."
"The reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."
"My favorite part about Nessus is that you can customize the tool to scan exactly what you want. Microsoft releases new patches monthly on Patch Tuesday, and a lot of companies track that date. I set up Nessus for the day after Patch Tuesday to see which devices have already pushed those updates from Microsoft, so we can stay updated."
"It's scalable."
"It is a mature tool."
"The most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is website scanning."
"I like the fact that it was not expensive. I like that it's user-friendly."
"Quick assessments, compliance scores, and results are provided without having to do agents."
"It gives you an unlimited IP scan."
"It provides multiple recommendations towards the remedy of vulnerabilities."
"The interface could be improved by having sub-groups of tests, ultimately making the process of collecting tests faster."
"It was not as easy to use. The user-friendliness of it was somewhat lower than what I was expecting. It was also lacking in terms of the ease of the setup. There should be an automatic agent for deployment."
"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."
"The reporting is a bit cumbersome."
"The inventory management function in this solution needs improvement."
"From my point of view the solution basically is not for the big enterprise."
"The features are limited when it comes to scanning network devices for vulnerabilities."
"Tenable Nessus is not feasible for a large company."
"They should try to create an all-in-one solution."
"Some things in the user interface could be better. The user interface could allow more adjustments to plugins. The price could also be better."
"There should be a possibility to install agents on scanned machines. Tenable IO provides the capability of using local agents to check local problems, but this feature is not there in Tenable Nessus Professional. It would be nice to have something similar in Tenable Nessus Professional. We should have the capability to use local agents installed on the machines to locally check a problem."
More IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is ranked 40th in Vulnerability Management with 3 reviews while Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is rated 6.6, while Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment writes "Worthwhile from the regulatory requirements and analytics perspective, but is expensive and not easy to use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Acunetix, Rapid7 InsightVM and Orca Security, whereas Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Pentera. See our IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment 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.