Tenable Nessus excels in comprehensive vulnerability scanning, robust reporting, and flexibility in customization, but users desired better reporting capabilities, integration options, and faster scanning speeds. On the other hand, Wiz stands out for data security, exposure prevention, and focus on actionable insights, but users requires UI improvements, more customizations.
The summary above is based on 56 interviews we conducted recently with Tenable Nessus and Wiz users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The most valuable feature is how it scanned and detected through its database to let us know exactly what fixes we needed to put in place for the vulnerabilities. It detects and it also gives you the way to fix it."
"Among the most valuable features are scanning for vulnerabilities and the reporting. The reporting templates are okay. I like that I can see all the hosts with different vulnerabilities."
"User friendly and good dashboards."
"The results are not that bad, but the key selling point is that it is an affordable tool set."
"Once you get past the initial implementation, the solution is very stable."
"Makes ransomware checking and OS auditing and implementation relatively easy."
"It's scalable."
"It also has an executive report where you don't have to provide the client all the detail for them to sift though. But if they wish to dig through the detail they can."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"Multiple user access would be an area for improvement from a user-access perspective. A role-based access control feature would be great because at present, there is a limitation with only one account. If that account gets compromised or gets locked, then we will encounter problems."
"In Nessus Professional, the main drawback was that we could have a single-user login password. So it could be better in terms of security."
"It wasn't very clear how the scripts are running the scans. There's information about the script but it's not straightforward. The script information for each of the plugins should be available, but it doesn't give us straightforward direct information about how it was executed. That needs to be more clear."
"You can scale Nessus to the extent that you can afford it. You need to have a license for every device you scan. As long as you can afford the increased costs, you won't have a problem scaling it."
"One significant drawback we encounter is the tool's tendency to flag patched packages incorrectly. For instance, if a package is patched by Debian maintainers but not updated to a major or minor version, Nessus may still flag it as vulnerable based on its database. This discrepancy leads to false alarms and requires our developers, system admins, and DevOps teams to address them."
"One area with room for improvement is instead of there just being a PDF format for output, I'd like the option of an Excel spreadsheet, whereby I could better track remediation efforts and provide reporting off of that."
"Some things in the user interface could be better. The user interface could allow more adjustments to plugins. The price could also be better."
"To be honest, I haven't used it much to tell you that these are the things that should be improved. But I believe the UI should be enhanced somewhat. For example, there are two ways to find a report, and people are frequently confused as to which is the correct method for locating a full report. Sometimes they go in the opposite direction, so this is an area that may be improved."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"The only small pain point has been around some of the logging integrations. Some of the complexities of the script integrations aren't supported with some of the more automated infrastructure components. So, it's not as universal. For example, they have great support for cloud formation and other services, but if you're using another type of management utility or governance language for your infrastructure-as-code automation components, it becomes a little bit trickier to navigate that."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews while Wiz is ranked 4th in Vulnerability Management with 12 reviews. Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4, while Wiz is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wiz writes "Multiple features help us prioritize remediation, and agentless implementation reduces overhead". Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Tenable Security Center and Tanium, whereas Wiz is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Orca Security, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, AWS Security Hub and Lacework. See our Tenable Nessus vs. Wiz 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.
