Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Qualys VMDR vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 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

Qualys VMDR
Ranking in Container Security
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (3rd), Vulnerability Management (3rd), Configuration Management Databases (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Qualys VMDR is 2.4%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.1%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Qualys VMDR2.4%
SUSE NeuVector2.1%
Other95.5%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Vaibhav Ghule - PeerSpot reviewer
Soc Lead & Edr Administration at Persistent Systems
Continuous risk-based monitoring has strengthened incident response and vulnerability prioritization
I haven't explored Qualys VMDR's vulnerability lifecycle automation yet. One of my analysts mentioned that queries lack grouping operators in Qualys VMDR. From my experience, I would appreciate improvements in the query options in Qualys VMDR, specifically in the query-building process where I would need more features and operators. Additionally, we have been facing issues with Qualys on the cloud level. We cannot download the configuration profile from the cloud agent, and it is showing a pending action for download. During 2025, we noticed outages of Qualys a couple of times. I want to mention that there is an issue with receiving timely RCA deliveries. While this is not necessarily about the tool, it relates to support. The support has not been very responsive, and we are receiving RCAs a little delayed whenever we raise support cases or communicate with the TAMs. Additionally, the UI has a slight latency, which I and my team have experienced. They have also reported this latency issue when navigating through different pages.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at ProQuanta
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Detects new hosts along with vulnerabilities."
"It's really beneficial for scanning and interacting with the agent."
"I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even if tags aren't made."
"Using this product, we now have a vulnerability management cycle wherein VMDR plays a major role."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability detection and the scanning capability to enable identification of vulnerabilities across our network."
"Qualys VM had a recent upgrade and the newer version is supporting the cloud."
"It gives you a lot of options, and it integrates with our ServiceNow for ticketing and all."
"I find the solution's dashboard interesting...The response time is fine. You can pull up reports without dragging or consuming bandwidth."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
 

Cons

"I would like to see this solution more developed and competitive in the Cloud space."
"The IoT scan is not great."
"The solution is a bit expensive if you do not have access to discounts."
"The reporting and the GUI need improvements."
"The customer support is very bad."
"The reporting needs improvement. It should generate much more stuff like field reports."
"Qualys VMDR identifies vulnerabilities and suggests fixes. However, it does not automate patching unless the patch management module is purchased separately."
"Qualys VM's machine learning and artificial intelligence features could be improved."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We do see over $100,000 in terms of price, for mid-size programs. You likely will pay more than $100,000 without any discount. It is a bit pricey."
"It is a high cost product. Compared to the other solutions, it is around 15 to 20% higher in cost."
"There is a license for the use of this solution. We pay annually instead of monthly to receive a better discount on the price."
"Qualys VM is better suited for medium to large companies because the price can be too much for smaller customers."
"In Nigerian Naira, we spend about roughly four to five million to use this solution and this is expensive compared to solutions like Nessus."
"There are no additional fees in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The tool's pricing is expensive and I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"It's very expensive, especially if you want to use multiple modules of Qualys."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise70
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Qualys VMDR?
I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys VMDR?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing shows that we can consider both time and money saved.
What needs improvement with Qualys VMDR?
I haven't explored Qualys VMDR's vulnerability lifecycle automation yet. One of my analysts mentioned that queries lack grouping operators in Qualys VMDR. From my experience, I would appreciate imp...
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features be...
What is your primary use case for NeuVector?
In my company, I am looking to deploy a container security runtime solution.
 

Also Known As

Qualys VM, QualysGuard VM, Qualys Asset Inventory, Qualys Container Security
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agrokor Group, American Specialty Health, American State Bank, Arval, Life:), Axway, Bank of the West, Blueport Commerce, BSkyB, Brinks, CaixaBank, Cartagena, Catholic Health System, CEC Bank, Cegedim, CIGNA, Clickability, Colby-Sawyer College, Commercial Bank of Dubai, University of Utah, eBay Inc., ING Singapore, National Theatre, OTP Bank, Sodexo, WebEx
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys VMDR vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.