No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Ivanti Autonomous Endpoint Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (23rd)
Ivanti Autonomous Endpoint ...
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (8th), Vulnerability Management (25th), Mobile Device Management (MDM) (6th), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) (5th), Mobile Threat Defense (5th), Patch Management (5th), Cloud Cost Management (19th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (6th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (8th), Autonomous Endpoint Management (4th)
 

Featured Reviews

AshishPaliwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-employed at Self-employed
Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability
An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite. There are a lot of GRC suites available, like Archer, MetricStream, Rsam, Protiviti, for example. So how would a solution like this work if my company has already invested thousands or maybe millions in a GRC solution? Do I still need it and how does it fit into an existing SAP environment? There could be interoperability, having more data sources, integrating Splunk, Qualys, FireEye, Rapid7, Carbon Black. I'm sure all that can be done to an extent, with a little more insight and a little more accuracy on the industry numbers and trends. I'd like the solution to offer any sort of assistance in any way with the remediation part, not just identification of vulnerability risk, and that is second.
reviewer2882148 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees
Automated onboarding has saved hundreds of hours and now standardizes device security globally
In terms of how Ivanti Neurons for UEM can be improved, I think there's potential for automation of some repetitive tasks. The device provisioning process has already become very close to zero-touch, but the patch deployment is still scheduled and policy-driven. As a result, I believe we can reduce endpoint administration further. I also think the number of integrations and the scalability of the tool can be improved, along with customer service, as we've encountered some issues in certain countries. Regarding the needed improvements, particularly concerning integrations or customer service challenges, we have had problems with integration with some third-party tools requiring additional configuration and testing. Occasionally, we also experienced delays between systems, particularly with user group changes and device compliance updates. The accuracy and reliability of output from Ivanti's AI can be improved. We notice that the AI-driven insights are useful, but there are anomalies and some false positives. Since we are still in a validation period, I cannot provide a definitive mark, but I believe that accuracy should be enhanced, especially for more complex and environment-specific issues where human intervention is still needed.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature; that is what it is used for and then data from different sources can be fed into it, and they have good dashboards, risk meters, and virtualization."
"The solution is good, it's effective in what it is able to achieve and it's easy to use."
"They have an excellent support team."
"We can set a maintenance window and push the patch."
"Most of the features are similar to what other tools have, but the UIs are quite user friendly. A beginner could use it."
"I like the product's Peer to Peer patching feature."
"We manage over 1,000 new devices per year, saving more than 1,500 hours of manual IT work annually."
"The products are quite good when they are operational."
"AI-powered automation and self-healing are additional features that automatically fix common issues and reduce manual work."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"The MDM, asset management, and software spend management are areas that could have more improvement in Ivanti Neurons for MDM."
"The disadvantage in connection with Windows devices is that the pushing of policies takes some time."
"The price being quite high and the limited container storage are areas that have room for improvement."
"MobileIron UEM could improve the monitoring of devices."
"Customers sometimes ask about non-existent features, and we pass these requests on to Ivanti."
"I would also like to see more integrations, plugins, and user-friendly automation, similar to the multiple integration scripts that Rapid7 has."
"From my perspective of having just moved away from the product, I would probably give it a six."
"UI needs an upgrade, feels very outdated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
"The solution is expensive compared to other products."
"While the price is a bit high, it may be equitable with the features one gets with the product, such as that involving the interface."
"My impression is that MobileIron is very expensive."
"The license can get expensive if you have a lot of nodes."
"For the one that works with SCCM, it is relatively inexpensive at $8 USD per node, yearly. The standalone product has two versions; the one that patches servers is about $45 USD annually and the version that patches workstations is about half that price at $22 USD."
"The solution is affordable."
"The price of MobileIron UEM is very good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ivanti Neurons for UEM?
Regarding pricing, I would say Ivanti Neurons for UEM falls at a nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with Ivanti Neurons for UEM?
The price being quite high and the limited container storage are areas that have room for improvement.
What is your primary use case for Ivanti Neurons for UEM?
I use Ivanti Neurons for UEM for mobile device management, and I can describe the use case. The remote device management feature has helped our remote work strategy because manual intervention is n...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
Ivanti Neurons for Patch Management,Ivanti Neurons for RBVM,Ivanti Neurons for VULN KB,Ivanti Mobile Threat Defense,Ivanti Neurons for Spend Intelligence, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune, Ivanti Neurons for EASM
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
Frontier Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Horizon3.ai, Tenable and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.