We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Vulnerability Management 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 →
"It is quite straightforward to set up."
"The best feature of the solution is the amount of visibility it provides of the vulnerabilities."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is an easy-to-use product. I"
"The initial setup is not complex."
"The solution can integrate with third parties and meets standard compliance."
"It is very stable, and it is updated periodically by adding new vulnerabilities."
"The price of Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is reasonable as it is ten times cheaper than other options."
"The solution's most valuable feature is providing a single pane of visibility on all the infrastructure and its status."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"Tenable could improve visibility into assets, including automated asset tagging. You should be able to automatically tag assets based on location, function, ownership, etc. That would help us because we spend a lot of time identifying and tagging assets by hand."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"We'd like to see a bit more user-friendliness."
"There needs to be better dashboard navigation."
"Another area of improvement is customer service and support. Tenable needs to include support in the pricing/license. Currently, they push clients to get support from partners or channel distributors, who often charge a lot."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management could be improved with an increased number of dashboards and MSSP integration."
"The price could be lower."
"It can have more integration."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable Vulnerability Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 10th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Tenable Vulnerability Management is ranked 2nd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 38 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Tenable Vulnerability Management 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 Tenable Vulnerability Management writes "Discovers vulnerabilities and integrates well with other solutions". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Cisco SecureX, whereas Tenable Vulnerability Management is most compared with Tenable Security Center, Tenable Nessus, Qualys VMDR, Amazon Inspector and Microsoft Defender 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.