We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Qualys VMDR 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's really beneficial for scanning and interacting with the agent."
"It's a good product. After the scan our internet works well. It scans our security posture."
"The biggest benefit is from a security operations perspective, where we are able to drive our security posture upwards by remediating any discovered vulnerabilities."
"Detects new hosts along with vulnerabilities."
"What I like about Qualys VM is the dashboard presentation. It's very good."
"The initial setup was good. We didn't have any problems with it."
"Qualys VM's most valuable feature is automatic detection."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Cons →
"There's a need to upgrade or fix the potential vulnerability rate. Around 20,000 potential vulnerabilities were showing in Qualys VMDR, but none of the other tools showed them. When we checked, it wasn't the case. Support explained that even small issues were being counted as vulnerabilities, causing issues in our audit. So, the security features could be improved to identify vulnerabilities accurately."
"The tool needs to improve the adding assets and report generation features. I would like to see the policy scan of offline appliances in the product's future releases."
"They're still evolving their platform in terms of reporting capabilities."
"It is more expensive vs. other products on the market."
"Qualys currently does not have any features for scanning SCADA, IoT, and Industrial Control Systems."
"We face issues while scanning multiple assets."
"The customer support is very bad."
"Qualys VM could improve by having more skilled support personnel."
More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is ranked 11th in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 1 review while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is rated 8.0, while Qualys VMDR 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 Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is most compared with Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Ivanti Neurons for RBVM, Brinqa and Avalor, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable 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.