Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Tenable Security Center comparison

Cisco and Tenable are both solutions in the Risk-Based Vulnerability Management category. Cisco is ranked #19, while Tenable is ranked #4 with an average rating of 9.1. Cisco holds a 2.7% mindshare in RBVM, compared to Tenable’s 9.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tenable users who would recommend it.

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...

Read 1 Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) review

1,035 Views
652 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tenable Security Center

Read 56 Tenable Security Center reviews

7,708 Views
3,469 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...

Tenable Security Center

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,665 peers since 2012

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

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cisco Security Portfolio (11th)

Tenable Security Center

Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Risk-Based Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is 2.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Security Center is 9.0%, down from 17.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Tenable Security Center	9.0%
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)	2.7%
Other	88.3%

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management

Featured Reviews

AshishPaliwal

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.

Read full review

OndrejKOVAC

Solution engineer at EXPERTience

Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights

Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.

Read full review

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 most valuable feature of this solution is the vulnerability assessment."

"Compliance and vulnerability scans are most valuable. Compliance scan helps in validating how our teams are complying, and vulnerability scan helps in future-proofing. Its vulnerability detection is accurate."

"The most valuable feature is the automatic and periodic management of security scans, along with the ability to consolidate all information into a single dashboard."

"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."

"Overall, I rate the solution 9.8 out of 10."

"It is a very good and user-friendly product."

"The valauble feature is compliance reporting system."

"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."

More Tenable Security Center pros

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."

"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"

"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."

"Tenable's technical support has declined in quality over time. While they used to be excellent, achieving ratings of eight or nine, they now rate around six or seven due to longer response times and less thorough assistance."

"The web application is not very functional."

"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 product should provide risk-based vulnerability management."

"The reporting needs a lot of work on the template."

"The solution should provide better web application features and support."

More Tenable Security Center cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."

"We're happy with the licensing cost and find it affordable."

"The pricing is more than Nexpose."

"Compared to other companies or other products it could maybe be a little bit less, but the price is okay. I would say it's not very expensive."

"My company needs to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs. The pricing of the solution falls in the mid-range level, so it is not too expensive"

"I use a local license to perform penetration testing and I'm pretty happy with everything when it comes to pricing and licensing."

"Tenable SC is priced per asset, with the basic solution starting around US$12,000 for 500 assets."

"It is slightly more expensive than other solutions in the same sphere."

"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."

More Tenable Security Center pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Retailer

14%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

10%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	22
Midsize Enterprise	10
Large Enterprise	27

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Tenable SC?

The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Vulcan Cyber vs Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)

Compared 15% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)

Compared 12% of the time

Rapid7 InsightVM vs Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)

Compared 9% of the time

Unified Vulnerability Management vs Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)

Compared 9% of the time

Ivanti Neurons for RBVM vs Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)

Compared 7% of the time

More Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) Competitors

Rapid7 InsightVM vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 11% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 10% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 8% of the time

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 6% of the time

The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 4% of the time

More Tenable Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management

January 2026

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) report

Download Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) product report

Buyer's Guide

Tenable Security Center

January 2026

Download Tenable Security Center product report

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform

Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter

Overview

Cisco Vulnerability Management equips you with the contextual insight and threat intelligence needed to intercept the next exploit and respond with precision.

Prioritization is no longer a dark art—it's data science. Advanced algorithms, combined with rich internal and external intel, offer recommended fixes that will lower risk in as few moves as possible.

Track vulnerability fluctuations and forecast weaponization with up to 94% accuracy, giving you the chance to remediate high-risk vulnerabilities before bad actors can mount an attack.

With more than 19 threat intelligence feeds at your fingertips, you gain a comprehensive view of emerging threats, shifting trends, and your own risk profile.

A single source of data-verified truth aligns security and IT, eliminating friction and freeing up resources. And intuitive, simplified risk scores help you generate reports anyone can understand.

Cisco

Get a risk-based view of your IT, security and compliance posture so you can quickly identify, investigate and prioritize your most critical assets and vulnerabilities.

Managed on-premises and powered by Nessus technology, the Tenable Security Center (formerly Tenable.sc) suite of products provides the industry’s most comprehensive vulnerability coverage with real-time continuous assessment of your network. It’s your complete end-to-end vulnerability management solution.

Tenable

Sample Customers

TransUnion

IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific

Buyer's Guide

Risk-Based Vulnerability Management

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.