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."The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The product is easy to use."
"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"It is scalable. It's in line with our needs."
"It contains almost all the available exploits and payloads."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"It allows us to concentrate solely on identified vulnerabilities without the hassle of additional setup."
"The Search Engineering feature is good."
"I use Rapid7 Metasploit for payload generation and Post-Exploitation."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scripts, the modules, and the tools that the Rapid7 Metasploit framework has."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The price could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
"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 solution should improve the responsiveness of its live technical support."
"Rapid7 Metasploit can add a GUI feature because it is only available online."
"It is necessary to add some training materials and a tutorial for beginners."
"There are numerous outdated exploits in their database that should be updated."
"We'd like them to offer better coverage of malware."
"The solution is not very scalable, it does not provide any automation to be able to scale it."
"The initial setup was a bit "tweaky" for the open-source version."
"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."
Pentera is ranked 15th in Vulnerability Management with 5 reviews while Rapid7 Metasploit is ranked 11th 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.
