We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and CyberGRX 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 →
"The interface is simple to use."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"There are not many partners for this product in India, which makes the OEM very difficult to reach."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 10th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while CyberGRX is ranked 60th in GRC. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while CyberGRX is rated 6.0. 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 CyberGRX writes "Scales well and technical support is good, but it is expensive". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Skybox Security Suite, whereas CyberGRX is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, UpGuard Vendor Risk and SecurityScorecard.
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.