- Home
- ...
- Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Software
- Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
- Tenable Vulnerability Management
- Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)-vs-Tenable Vulnerability Management
Compare Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Vulnerability Management 
At a Glance
Market Segments
Enterprise (76.5% of reviews)
Enterprise (57.0% of reviews)
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
No pricing available
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
Star Rating
(217)4.3 out of 5
Market Segments
Enterprise (76.5% of reviews)
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)Tenable Vulnerability Management
Star Rating
(110)4.5 out of 5
Market Segments
Enterprise (57.0% of reviews)
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Free Trial is available
Learn more about Tenable Vulnerability ManagementSummary
AI Generated Summary
AI-generated. Powered by real user reviews.
- Users report that Cisco Vulnerability Management excels in its Automated Scans feature, scoring a high 9.2, which allows for efficient and timely vulnerability assessments. In contrast, Tenable Vulnerability Management, while strong, has a lower score of 9.3 for Vulnerability Scanning, indicating a more manual approach that some users find less efficient.
- Reviewers mention that Cisco's Risk Scoring feature is highly effective, achieving a score of 9.0, which helps prioritize vulnerabilities based on risk. Tenable, with a score of 8.8, offers a solid alternative but lacks the same level of granularity in risk assessment that some users desire.
- G2 users highlight the superior Quality of Support from Cisco Vulnerability Management, which scored 8.7, compared to Tenable's 7.9. Users appreciate the responsiveness and expertise of Cisco's support team, making it a preferred choice for organizations needing reliable assistance.
- Users on G2 report that Cisco's Multi-Cloud Management feature, scoring 9.0, provides a seamless experience for organizations operating in diverse cloud environments. Tenable's capabilities in this area are commendable but do not match the comprehensive support offered by Cisco.
- Reviewers mention that Cisco Vulnerability Management's Risk-Prioritization feature, with a score of 9.1, allows for effective decision-making in vulnerability remediation. In comparison, Tenable's score of 8.8 indicates a solid but less dynamic approach to prioritizing risks.
- Users say that while both products offer robust Reporting features, Cisco's score of 8.5 is slightly higher than Tenable's 8.3, suggesting that Cisco provides more actionable insights and user-friendly reports that help teams understand their security posture better.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
No pricing availableTenable Vulnerability Management
No pricing availableFree Trial
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
Free Trial is available
Tenable Vulnerability Management
Free Trial is available
Ratings
Meets Requirements
8.6
158
8.8
71
Ease of Use
8.5
161
8.9
73
Ease of Setup
8.4
73
8.7
57
Ease of Admin
8.4
75
8.7
56
Quality of Support
8.7
137
7.9
70
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
8.9
74
8.5
56
Product Direction (% positive)
8.7
150
8.7
74
Features by Category
Performance
Not enough data
8.4
40
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.0
42
|
Verified
Not enough data
7.1
42
|
Verified
Not enough data
9.2
42
|
Verified
Network
Not enough data
8.6
38
|
Verified
Not enough data
8.7
37
Not enough data
8.8
34
|
Verified
Application
Not enough data
Feature Not Available
Not enough data
7.7
27
Not enough data
Feature Not Available
Monitoring
Not enough data
8.9
9
Not enough data
8.5
9
Not enough data
7.5
8
Not enough data
8.9
9
Administration
Not enough data
9.1
9
Not enough data
9.0
7
Not enough data
8.3
10
Analysis
Not enough data
7.7
11
Not enough data
8.2
11
Not enough data
8.0
9
Risk Analysis
9.0
128
8.8
48
8.5
127
8.3
49
9.1
124
8.8
48
Vulnerability Assesment
8.4
118
9.3
49
8.7
126
9.1
47
8.3
126
8.6
44
8.5
126
8.3
47
Automation
7.3
92
7.9
39
7.5
91
8.1
37
7.7
94
8.2
41
7.6
87
8.2
42
ServiceNow Apps
Not enough data
8.3
7
Not enough data
8.3
7
Categories
Categories
Shared Categories
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Vulnerability Management are categorized as Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
Unique Categories
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) has no unique categories
Tenable Vulnerability Management is categorized as Cloud Infrastructure Monitoring, Vulnerability Scanner, and ServiceNow Store Apps
Reviews
Reviewers' Company Size
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Tenable Vulnerability Management
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Small-Business
(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market
(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise
(> 1000 emp.)
Reviewers' Industry
Information Technology and Services
22.0%
Financial Services
12.0%
Retail
8.0%
Computer & Network Security
7.5%
Computer Software
6.5%
Other
44.0%
Information Technology and Services
14.0%
Financial Services
13.0%
Computer & Network Security
9.0%
Banking
7.0%
Computer Software
6.0%
Other
51.0%
Most Helpful Reviews
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)
Most Helpful Favorable Review
Ravindra K.
Verified User in Computer Software
Kenna score, vulnerability status, fixes
Most Helpful Critical Review
Verified User in Pharmaceuticals
sometime its hard to work with queries , they should work more on creating simple queries.
Tenable Vulnerability Management
Most Helpful Favorable Review
Verified User in Computer Software
The speed at which the platform incorporates new vulnerabilities is critical to it being the leading product.
Most Helpful Critical Review
Ben C.
Verified User in Information Technology and Services
The reporting capability is really poor and the new interface they released is incredibly lacking functionality that makes you continue going back to the classic interface.
Ravindra K.
Verified User in Computer Software
Kenna score, vulnerability status, fixes
Verified User in Computer Software
The speed at which the platform incorporates new vulnerabilities is critical to it being the leading product.
Verified User in Pharmaceuticals
sometime its hard to work with queries , they should work more on creating simple queries.
Ben C.
Verified User in Information Technology and Services
The reporting capability is really poor and the new interface they released is incredibly lacking functionality that makes you continue going back to the classic interface.
Discussions
Is there a way to sort by most recently changed asset scores?
1 comment
SM
"Hi Matt. You are correct. You cannot sort directly on the last time that an asset score changed, but remember that Kenna is designed to pull you out of the...Read more
Training - is there training that I can take to be more efficient with this tool?
1 comment
SM
Joe - Excellent question. Customers have the option to engage with their assigned CX team, and for those customers who have elected to have a lower touch...Read more
What is the best way to onboard new user/hire to leverage the Kenna tool to its fullest ?
1 comment
SM
Andy - thanks for reaching out with this question. Customers have the option to engage with the Kenna CX team and related resources. We have developed an...Read more
Please advice on best practices for utilizing API to tie to visualization dashboards such as Power BI, Qlick, or Tableau
1 comment
G2
TableRead more
What is tenable io?
1 comment
CK
Tenable.io is user-friendly front end for Nessus scanners that provides a digestible view of all of the data the scanner is picking up. It allows you to...Read more
Hunting for software insights?
With over 2.5 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.
or continue with
Gmail.com addresses not permitted. A business domain using Google is allowed.
By proceeding, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
