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

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Tenable Security Center 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...
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th)
Tenable Security Center
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (14th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Risk-Based Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is 2.1%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Security Center is 7.2%, down from 11.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tenable Security Center7.2%
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)2.1%
Other90.7%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

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.
reviewer1534134 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Information Security at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
Centralized analytics have strengthened patch visibility and support efficient regulatory reporting
From my experience, I assess the product's analytics capabilities as successful. It helped us significantly with patching and managing the risk of the patching process across all our environments, including network devices with Windows and Unix systems. The product covered several environments and gave us exactly what we needed in our environment. Tenable Security Center's centralized platform helped with risk assessment and management across our IT environments. It covered the patching process, and we previously faced many issues regarding how to patch different environments, how to monitor the patching process, and whether it was successful or not. We obtained good reports showing when patches were closed and the details of each patch, including who executed it and everything related to the patching process until it was closed. This gave us good details about the process which helped us significantly in our reporting and even in audits, whether internal or external. We learned how to close audit issues safely and successfully. We used the dashboards for real-time threat insights and extracted several dashboards from Tenable Security Center. We use these dashboards in our cybersecurity dashboard and committees that we have. These dashboards are part of our committees, especially the cybersecurity committee and other committees that we attend.

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 usability is really good; it's very intuitive and any person can use it, you do not have to be an expert in vulnerability analysis."
"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."
"Tenable SecurityCenter has absolutely improved our organization, by making everything more secure and helping ensure solid vulnerability management."
"Technical support is excellent. They are extremely responsive and very helpful."
"Tenable Security Center is a relatively very good solution, and I don't think it needs improvement; it's a perfect solution."
"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"The customer service and support team at Tenable were extremely helpful."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"In the next release, we would like to see the inclusion of external IPs and simplified reporting that's easier to deal with."
"Deploying Tenable.sc is highly complex because it's an on-prem solution, whereas Tenable.io is cloud-based, so you can go live as soon as you log in. Tenable.sc involves significant integration with other on-prem solutions, and the deployment takes about two to three weeks with the help of a system integrator"
"Certain aspects require manual effort, such as exporting and analyzing data for our dashboards. The built-in components of the Tenable solution are somewhat clumsy that require external tools. So, this is an area of improvement."
"The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator."
"Tenable SC could improve by making the creation of the initial reports easier that correspond to our network."
"At times we have had the typical bugs."
"A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center."
"The reason for rating it an eight out of ten is that the initial setup could be easier; the setup is rather difficult, and that's why we are focusing on the initial hearing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
"The tool costs around 15,000 Saudi riyals monthly."
"The licensing costs for this solution are approximately $100,000 US, and I think that covers everything."
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"Costing is pretty reasonable compared to the competition."
"It is slightly more expensive than other solutions in the same sphere."
"The price of Tenable SC is expensive, we pay approximately €70,000 for the license annually. We have to pay for each IP test. The cost of other solutions is far less, such as Nessus Professional, which is €3,000 annually."
"This solution's price is quite high."
"I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, where ten is expensive. It is the most expensive tool my company is using."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 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
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
The price of Tenable Security Center is not so high; it's relatively a cheaper solution.
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
We did conduct a long implementation which relates to what I think can be improved about Tenable Security Center. In some cases, we needed to refer back to Tenable itself, and in other cases, we ne...
What is your primary use case for Tenable SC?
The typical use case for Tenable Security Center is that it is an on-premise solution, and it can use the agent and active scanning, which is needed by governmental organizations and manufacturers,...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Horizon3.ai, Tenable and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: August 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.