We performed a comparison between Tenable Nessus and Acunetix based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Tenable Nessus comes out ahead of Acunetix. Even though both solutions offer beneficial vulnerability scanning and a proactive approach, Acunetix’s two-year licensing plan is less flexible than that of its competitor, and its need for manual resolution of false positives leaves room for improvement.
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"The product's most valuable features are vulnerability and asset management. It can define the rules and validate the configuration."
"The solution is the most dynamic one I have seen thus far."
"I have experience with it on my attack stations, and it's pretty good to optimize. Personally, I think Nessus is quite a good product."
"Tenable Nessus has a good performance, is very user-friendly, and is easy to use."
"The features of Tenable Nessus that I have found most valuable are its reliability and its ability to collate a dependable output, where we are able to get the same vulnerability when we test manually. The output is quite reliable."
"The solution is easy to understand for users because instructions are included on the platform."
"It provides multiple recommendations towards the remedy of vulnerabilities."
"The plug-in text information is quite useful."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."
"They have added a new Tenable Nessus Expert. That is their new product, which caters to the cloud and everything else. I am assuming that the new features and product enhancements are based on that tool set, but we haven't reviewed it yet."
"EQA's and dashboards should be addressed in the next release."
"The reporting feature needs to be improved."
"Model OS costs (and its segregation schema for individual modules)."
"The product must be more comprehensive."
"We would like to have the option of using the solution for the cloud as well as on-premises with the same license at the same time. That would be very helpful."
"One area with room for improvement is instead of there just being a PDF format for output, I'd like the option of an Excel spreadsheet, whereby I could better track remediation efforts and provide reporting off of that."
"Tenable Nessus could improve the reporting by adding some dashboards. The reports are a hassle at this time. Tenable.io has more detailed reports. Having a better dashboard that can show where the vulnerabilities are and be categorized would be helpful. We then could present them to upper management for a deep overview of our network posture which they do not see."
Acunetix is ranked 15th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while Tenable Nessus is ranked 3rd in Vulnerability Management with 75 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Tenable Nessus is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Nessus writes "Unlimited assets for one price and quick, agentless results". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Tenable Nessus is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Security Center, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Snyk. See our Acunetix vs. Tenable Nessus report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all 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.