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

Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs Tenable Vulnerability Management comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (6th)
Arctic Wolf Managed Risk
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (11th)
Tenable Vulnerability Manag...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.4%. The mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Vulnerability Management is 6.9%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

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.
Jared Kruger - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to conduct vulnerability scans but needs to add more integrations
There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them.
Mani Bommisetty - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlines vulnerability management with excellent reporting and potential AI integration
Tenable is user-friendly and excels in reporting. It allows me to easily fetch and schedule reports. The software's discovery feature aids in strengthening our security posture. The single-sensor installation process on various operating systems is smooth, unlike Rapid7, which requires different versions for separate systems. Furthermore, Tenable enables vulnerability management through potential AI integration that consolidates efforts and resolves multiple vulnerabilities simultaneously.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We get access to quarterly reviews with their team."
"I appreciate the professionalism of the tool and have faith in the results it delivers."
"The customer support is incredible."
"We have a patch management solution that scans for any patches that can be applied and then applies these patches, but it doesn't hit everything. It also doesn't find all misconfigurations and things like that. Arctic Wolf Managed Risk kind of fills in the gaps and makes us aware of vulnerabilities or misconfigurations that exist out there. It does an agent scan for software versions and compares them to what CVs are out there and lets us know."
"There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you to scan and patch the vulnerabilities. Any 50-member or small company that has an IT footprint carries risk from a cybersecurity perspective. These companies use tools but don't have the talent to leverage them."
"This solution has made huge strides in improving the awareness of our end users."
"The most valuable feature of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is being informed about what vulnerabilities there are exposed currently."
"The reporting is really good from what I've seen so far."
"The best feature of the solution is the amount of visibility it provides of the vulnerabilities."
"The vulnerability management itself is the most valuable feature as well as references to the mitigation techniques."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I would rate Tenable's dashboards and reporting capabilities for illustrating security posture a nine out of ten, with ten being the best."
"The solution is quite friendly."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"You can customize each point in new scans."
"It's a recommended tool for penetration testers because it's effective for that purpose."
 

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 presentation of the data could be improved."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"As far as the product is concerned, I would really like the scanning feature to let us know that a threat has been addressed once we apply the relevant patch. We are not seeing this currently when running a scan."
"The scalability could improve."
"The major area for improvement is the lack of a patch management feature to resolve some of the vulnerabilities detected."
"The presentation of the data could be improved. I believe they have significant room for improvement, particularly in making better analysis of the vulnerability data and presenting those data more effectively."
"It could be easier to use. They could present things in a little bit more ranked order rather than kind of giving you everything out there. It should highlight the really important stuff and make it easier to get to good rather than perfect."
"The best way to take this product to the next level would be to implement a patch management solution."
"More flexibility is required compared to other solutions."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement."
"The product could be easier to set up on the cloud."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management could be improved with an increased number of dashboards and MSSP integration."
"We'd like to see a bit more user-friendliness."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price of Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonable compared to the competition."
"It depends on the company size quite a bit."
"Arctic Wolf Managed Risk is reasonably priced and I rate it a four out of ten."
"Tenable charges around $40 per device."
"The cost is determined by the number of endpoints, which is approximately one dollar per endpoint."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing cost of the product. It is neither a cheap nor an expensive product."
"I would rate the pricing a five out of ten. It is in the middle."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management's pricing solution model isn't great."
"The total cost we pay for this solution is over 45K. This is for a large education organization."
"The solution is not too expensive."
"Compared to other VM solutions, Tenable.io Vulnerability Management is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
849,475 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
 

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?
I find that the pricing for Zafran aligns well with the comprehensive features it offers. The asset and user-based li...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
While Zafran Security is already a powerful tool, there are areas where it could be further improved to provide even ...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Our primary use case for Zafran involves leveraging it to enhance our vulnerability risk scoring methodology. In toda...
What do you like most about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
There are companies that do vulnerability scans. However, what adds value is when two experts come and sit with you t...
What needs improvement with Arctic Wolf Managed Risk?
The presentation of the data could be improved. I believe they have significant room for improvement, particularly in...
What's the difference between Tenable Nessus and Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
Tenable Nessus is a vulnerability assessment solution that is both easy to deploy and easy to manage. The design of ...
What needs improvement with Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
I would suggest HP WebInspect as a better option than Tenable.io. My current client doesn't have access to it. Howeve...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Tenable.io
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Zelle LLP, DNI Corp, Roper Pump, Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice
Global Payments AU/NZ
Find out what your peers are saying about Arctic Wolf Managed Risk vs. Tenable Vulnerability Management and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,475 professionals have used our research since 2012.