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 reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."
"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 most valuable feature of Tenable Nessus is the support it provides for any new vulnerabilities quickly."
"Its initial setup was simple and straightforward."
"The solution is the most dynamic one I have seen thus far."
"Overall Zoom is a good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are vulnerability and asset management. It can define the rules and validate the configuration."
"Makes ransomware checking and OS auditing and implementation relatively easy."
"Quick assessments, compliance scores, and results are provided without having to do agents."
"With the Tenable Nessus enterprise edition, you have unlimited licenses to scan the device."
"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."
"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."
"Nessus' reporting could be more user-friendly."
"The reporting could be improved. The reporting in Rapid7 is much better."
"Consumes more system resources when it's running."
"They should improve the I/O reporting and the customized spreadsheet export feature."
"The inventory management function in this solution needs improvement."
"There is room, overall, for improvement in the way it groups the workstations and the way it detects, when the vulnerability is scanned. Even when we would run a new scan, if it was an already existing vulnerability, it wouldn't put a new date on it."
"Technically, it is an excellent and the best solution available in Libya. My only concern is related to its pricing. They are an emerging company in Libya, and they need to put in some effort to provide us with very good prices so that customers can go with the best solution. Chinese companies are getting into the market here, and they're providing very cheap solutions."
"The report for counters is too simple and would be improved by a dashboard."
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.