We performed a comparison between Pentera and Rapid7 Metasploit 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."What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"The option to generate phishing emails has proven to be very valuable in understanding the behavior of users."
"The Search Engineering feature is good."
"It allows us to concentrate solely on identified vulnerabilities without the hassle of additional setup."
"The reporting on the solution is good."
"Rapid7 Metasploit is a useful product."
"The most valuable feature for us is the support for testing Linux-based web server components."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The tool's most useful feature for penetration testing is its automation capabilities. With the professional edition, you can upload the results from Nessus in the Rapid7 Metasploit solution portal."
"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 vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"The price could be improved."
"Rapid7 Metasploit could be made easier for new users to learn."
"The solution is not very scalable, it does not provide any automation to be able to scale it."
"The open-source version has reporting limitations. You need to develop these capabilities yourself. Built-in reporting is an excellent feature for penetration testing, but it isn't a must-have. The solution could also cover more vulnerabilities. Metasploit has around 10,000 exploits in its library, but more is always better."
"The solution is not user-friendly and has room for improvement."
"I think areas with shortcomings that need improvement are more integration and automation."
"We'd like them to offer better coverage of malware."
"Better automation capabilities would be an improvement."
"It is necessary to add some training materials and a tutorial for beginners."
Pentera is ranked 12th in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Rapid7 Metasploit is ranked 13th in Vulnerability Management with 18 reviews. Pentera is rated 8.2, while Rapid7 Metasploit is rated 7.6. 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 Rapid7 Metasploit writes "Helps find vulnerabilities in a system to determine whether the system needs to be upgraded". Pentera is most compared with Cymulate, Tenable Nessus, Picus Security, Horizon3.ai and Rapid7 InsightVM, whereas Rapid7 Metasploit is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Acunetix, Rapid7 InsightVM, Nucleus and Wireshark. See our Pentera vs. Rapid7 Metasploit 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.
