We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tanium 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 product’s most valuable features are compliance, recommendations, and inventories."
"The product's stability is very high...The scalability of the product is amazing."
"One valuable feature is the Microsoft Security Scorecard."
"The solution is up-to-date and helps prevent zero-day attacks."
"The solution helps identify threats and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the consolidation of all historical data on device endpoints, security drivers, firmware, and Software version gaps."
"I would say Tanium is the best tool for vulnerability management."
"I like the fact that you can create patching campaigns depending on the area of your network that you want to address first. I like the ability it has to make several campaigns that work in parallel."
"The interrogation piece was the most valuable feature because it was very detailed."
"Threat hunting is a very good feature on Tanium. We have just started using it and have not used it extensively."
"The security features are very valuable."
"I like the tool's incident response and security patching."
"Tanium has made the process of detecting threats more proactive with its detection. So, the process is easier and more efficient."
"It is challenging to extract and customize reports from the system."
"Integration can be improved."
"The general support could be improved."
"The technical support takes too much time to resolve tickets."
"The setup phase of the product is not that easy and needs a person to have a certain level of expertise."
"Any movement into a SaaS solution has challenges since the processes and data flows are not well defined. Hence, you need to build it at the same time."
"The main issues are the network connection because different customers have issues with their networks. It's difficult implementing this type of solution because the network is the main feature in the architecture for these types of solutions. Tanium could improve by creating some network optimization."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve the reporting and tracking capabilities."
"Tanium’s scalability could be improved."
"We had some issues with the solution's OS upgrade."
"The most painful thing is the interface. It's a bit unclear sometimes."
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
More Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is ranked 23rd in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Tanium is ranked 18th in Vulnerability Management with 15 reviews. Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is rated 8.2, while Tanium is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management writes "The vulnerability assessment is very accurate because it runs directly into the vulnerability database". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tanium writes "Useful tool for vulnerability management and deploying applications, needing improvement in its OS upgrade". Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Tenable Security Center, whereas Tanium is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Qualys VMDR and ServiceNow Discovery. See our Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs. Tanium 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.