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

Rapid7 InsightVM vs Tenable Security Center comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (27th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Rapid7 InsightVM
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (4th)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
Mahmoud Elhamaymy - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable scanning and integration strengthen security infrastructure
InsightVM has a very organized GUI with ease of use. The vulnerability scans are reliable, and the credential scan is a beneficial feature. The solution is efficient and trustworthy. It's based on the CVSS risk scoring system, which is well-recognized and effective. The integration capabilities through APIs allow easy integration with existing security infrastructure.
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"We can create our own templates."
"NeXpose is a pretty good vulnerability scanner... There's a nice dashboard."
"InsightVM has a very organized GUI with ease of use."
"You can bring in and get online to do reports fairly quickly,"
"I like Rapid7's scan optimization options."
"The main functionality of identifying item endpoints that weren't properly patched or had vulnerabilities is the solution's most valuable feature."
"This solution is much more user-friendly than past solutions I have used."
"It's a relevant management tool."
"The tool provides us insight into the happens of the network and its hosts. It provides me with a list of hosts."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"Tenable Security Center scans networks and gives reports."
"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."
"The valauble feature is compliance reporting system."
"Tenable.sc's best features are the availability model, accident management, and scoring."
"The most important features are the dashboard and reporting. The dashboard provides statistics with graphs and bar charts for our management."
"We really love the Security Center dashboard. It basically performs vulnerability scanning and then outputs a vulnerability data."
 

Cons

"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"The InsightVM cannot scan if we connect to our customer by the VPN."
"InsightVM could be improved by providing passive scanning as an option."
"There should be containerization within the VM."
"The product's documentation could be enhanced with clearer and more detailed instructions."
"I would like to see more integration."
"The reporting is very bad when you compare it with other vulnerability assessment tools."
"Reporting could be expanded."
"A definite improvement would be to make it easier to run ad-hoc scans without needing to assign the asset to a site or group."
"Current web page needs improvement, slows down processes."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution needs to improve the vulnerability assessment because we have experienced some challenges with accuracy."
"The solution is expensive."
"There is not much room for improvement. However, there should be a guide that describes the step-by-step procedures for doing tasks. Otherwise, training is required from a senior guy to a junior guy."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The reporting needs a lot of work on the template."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The license is annual and this is the optimal approach when it comes to most software."
"Pricing is reasonable because we pay according to asset usage. We can define our assets and sites according to our preference."
"InsightVM is an expensive product, especially compared to its competitors, at around a million NOK per year."
"It is pretty expensive. It depends on what you consider pricey, however, if you only look at vulnerability management solutions, such as within VM or VMDR, there are, I suppose the prices are almost the same. But I believe you will discover that for yourself."
"The solution is a bit more reasonably priced than other products."
"Its pricing depends on the number of users per month."
"It is less expensive compared to other competitors."
"The tool's price is neither too high nor too low. My company needs to pay 65,000 per year. There are no additional costs apart from the licensing fees attached to the solution."
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"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."
"Tenable is open-source."
"The tool costs around 15,000 Saudi riyals monthly."
"It is a bit expensive. Everything is included in the license."
"We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."
"I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, where ten is expensive. It is the most expensive tool my company is using."
"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"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
845,485 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Retailer
6%
Educational Organization
42%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Educational Organization
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
Pricing for Zafran Security is not expensive. We have a contract for five years, and the cost is lower than other too...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
I would like to see an integration with Check Point firewalls. It's essential for us and they are currently working o...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
We use Zafran Security for threat prioritization. We establish priority to understand which risks should be patched o...
How would you choose between Rapid7 InsightVM and Tenable Nessus?
You have full visibility across cloud, network, virtual, and containerized infrastructures with Rapid7 Insight VM. Yo...
What do you like most about Rapid7 InsightVM?
The product's initial setup phase was very easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 InsightVM?
Rapid7 InsightVM is expensive, possibly one of the highest in pricing among similar products.
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 ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pric...
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into Europea...
 

Also Known As

No data available
InsightVM, NeXpose
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ACS, Acosta, AllianceData, amazon.com, biogen idec, CBRE, CATERPILLAR, Deloitte, COACH, GameStop, IBM
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Rapid7 InsightVM vs. Tenable Security Center and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,485 professionals have used our research since 2012.