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

Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager [EOL] vs Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 4, 2026

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

Ivanti Patch for Endpoint M...
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qualys CyberSecurity Asset ...
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Patch Management (4th), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (3rd), Software Supply Chain Security (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

PraveenRajan - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Infrastructure at Elevate Services
Smoothly handles software patching and scheduling, enabling monthly patch distribution across multiple projects
We face some challenges, particularly with non-domain-joined macOS devices. Patching, updating, and syncing with the server can be tricky for them. So, the major challenges are macOS updates, patching, and backups. And for drawbacks, I wish Patch management was cloud-based instead of hosted on our own server. If Ivanti Patch had a cloud-based option instead of requiring an on-premises server and software. Hosting it in the cloud would simplify management, eliminating dependence on VPNs or other connectivity issues. Similar to Microsoft's EMS licensing, offering a cloud-based solution like Azure Active Directory or Endpoint Management Suite (EMS) would be ideal. EMS allows us to manage policies, batching, and software distribution entirely through the cloud, minimizing server downloads. If Ivanti considered a cloud-based approach, it would be hugely beneficial in today's hybrid work environment, where employees use desktops, laptops, and various locations. It's not just about patching office PCs anymore; mobile workers and backups need seamless access as well. Cloud-based patching would be much easier in a hybrid environment. Imagine updates coming directly from the cloud instead of relying on individual VPN connections. It would streamline the entire process.
Nicki Møller - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Enables automation and quick access to necessary information
One of the significant challenges Qualys is discovery, which I know Microsoft excels at. I can't recall how well Qualys performs this function; it seems I might be missing some details. However, if there's one key aspect to focus on, it's discovery—the ability to identify assets that you are not aware of, even when you can see they are present. Understanding what those assets are is crucial. With Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, it was very difficult to extract detections from the system. The features within Qualys are limited to what they have developed. Sometimes a complete overview is needed to push to a Power BI dashboard, Splunk, ServiceNow, or other platforms. The export process is incredibly challenging. We needed a developer to write a hundred-line Python script that would loop over certain assets due to export limitations. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management could improve its integration capabilities. While it generates substantial data, correlating it with other data sources can be challenging. The export process is difficult, and pre-built integrations with other tools could be enhanced for better process implementation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's been doing a lot for us, especially with third-party software patching and scheduling. We create multiple projects for monthly patch distribution and manage it all well."
"When it comes to Ivanti Patch for endpoints, I find peer-to-peer patching valuable. Having a peer-to-peer patching capability is highly beneficial for us."
"Clear visibility regarding the status of the endpoint."
"Because of the internet gateway, we were able to get clear visibility regarding the status of the endpoint which we needed to do recently when everyone was working from home."
"The product is easy to use, easy to implement, and easy to manage."
"I use it primarily with tagging, asset counts, and groups that we can put them in, and we also use it to tell if a device has been merged and seen in Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, so that's beneficial for us too."
"I appreciate the feature that simplifies cloud security posture, offering insights into vulnerabilities, and reducing the complexity of managing the security program."
"There are no stability issues, and I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"I would rate Qualys CSAM a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of Qualys CSAM include the ability to manage authorized and unauthorized applications efficiently. This feature helps in validating applications and maintaining a secure environment."
"With Qualys CSAM, we can see which assets have critical application vulnerabilities. This feature helps us prioritize and address these vulnerabilities more efficiently."
"My favourite feature of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is its ability to target missing software."
"Authorized and unauthorized software visibility is the best feature for me. It helps me understand security controls on our network and where we lack visibility. With a single security tool, we are able to get an extensive list."
 

Cons

"I'm currently struggling with one of the issues related to Linux or Ubuntu. Ivanti does not support Ubuntu and it has a limitation of CentOS to a specific version, which is CentOS 7, not 8."
"The UI must be more user-friendly."
"The major challenges are macOS updates, patching, and backups. And for drawbacks, I wish Patch management was cloud-based instead of hosted on our own server."
"Inability to configure a rule-based management."
"It would be great to have an easier way to patch Linux machines within the product."
"In the best practice for categorizing assets with the C-SAM module in Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, I see potential for improvement with integration of other CMDB systems in creating a relationship with Qualys and other solutions."
"From the user experience perspective, we need a simpler interface and reduced complexity in certain features, particularly with the Qualys Query Language."
"Based on the company's budget, Qualys offers limited features, which can also be utilized in other environments."
"One downside of Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management is that I would prefer to see a more interactive dashboard."
"All required features are available in Qualys CSAM. However, it would be helpful if Qualys CSAM started incorporating AI models. An inclusion of threat details for AI and LLM-related risks would be beneficial."
"In our reporting, we faced a challenge syncing with cloud devices."
"With Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management, it was very difficult to extract detections from the system."
"The only minor issue is occasionally being redirected to multiple teams, causing slight delays."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, it is on the expensive side."
"It is cost-effective because, in a single tool, we are getting everything. All the solutions come in a single license or price."
"The pricing is fair. I would love to see the price come down a little bit, but we do get a lot of value out of it. We are squeezing every ounce of value we can out of the tool."
"The pricing for Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management is reasonable, with an annual subscription costing around $1,000 per year or a monthly subscription starting at approximately $72 per month, depending on the specific package and features included."
"The pricing is reasonable relative to the features provided, as it collects all module data and operates as a main, centralized inventory, making it a cost-effective solution."
"Qualys offers excellent value for money."
"Qualys is competitively priced for its features. Its pricing is suitable for large organizations with more than 4,000 assets, but for smaller organizations with few assets, such as banks, the costs might be high. They should come up with packages that are suitable for small organizations."
"The Qualys Cybersecurity Asset Management pricing is well-aligned with our usage."
"The pricing is market-competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Patch Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I think the one thing Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management can do better is the package management and the updating process. Knowing that you can't update any of the packages until you've done the...
What is your primary use case for Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management?
I primarily use it for a small, single-site, multi-source setup with multi-WAN inputs. I have a main fiber connection and a couple of failovers while managing different networks across different se...
 

Also Known As

Ivanti Patch for Endpoints, Patch for Endpoints, Shavlik Patch for Endpoints
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

InfoPro Digital, Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager [EOL] vs. Qualys CyberSecurity Asset Management and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.