We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management."The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pros →
"Performs automated, regular scans in the network."
"I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even if tags aren't made."
"Monitors workstations and servers for vulnerabilities and creates reports."
"Vulnerability management is the most valuable one and it’s a must in every organization."
"Intuitive and easy to use."
"This is one of the best products I have worked with so far. I like the power of Qualys, and it's a better solution because you can scan a compact file, a BIT file, or batch files. The product already knows what's happening inside, and you don't need to expand the package. Tenable will do the same thing, but you need to have a package issuance claim. With Qualys, we can immediately understand the file, even a compact file. If there's some kind of discovery or incident, you will know what happened in the environment."
"It is quite easy to implement."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"Qualys currently does not have any features for scanning SCADA, IoT, and Industrial Control Systems."
"They have integrated with other third parties, but it is still not viable."
"When you want to cover yourself for scalability, you will be charged for the number you place on the scan itself."
"The reporting needs improvement. It should generate much more stuff like field reports."
"The only improvement I can think of is on the implementation side. At times it is a bit slow."
"Make some minimal dashboard improvements."
"Qualys VM's scanner doesn't pick up every vulnerability, so we have to use multiple scanners to cover that gap."
"I would like to see this solution more developed and competitive in the Cloud space."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 12th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) writes "Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM, Brinqa and Avalor, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management.
See our list of best Risk-Based Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Risk-Based 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.