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

Armis 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)
Armis
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (3rd), Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th), Cyber-Physical Systems Protection (2nd)
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.
Arun Chauhan - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides a very good vulnerability monitoring system, but the implementation is challenging
We face many issues while implementing Armis in the pharma sector. Some of the customer applications are not supported well by the tool. The applications do not communicate well if we implement Armis. We generally face such issues during implementation. We are planning to implement the product in the wind energy sector, but we don't have any idea how to do it. Currently, it is a very big challenge for us. Products like Dragos, Claroty, and Nozomi provide a much better experience during implementation. If any issues arise, we are told how to resolve such issues during the POC. Armis does not provide the secure remote access feature Claroty provides.
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 is an excellent tool."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"The technology is good."
"Armis is a straightforward and user-friendly solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is asset tracking."
"Armis is very easy to implement due to its agentless design and offers a granular level of visibility for all assets in the network."
"It determines which assets and devices are at risk, alerts you if there's a risk, and categorizes all assets, including personal computers, mobile phones, servers, televisions, cars, and video game consoles."
"The solution’s vulnerability monitoring system is very good."
"Armis is very easy to implement due to its agentless design and offers a granular level of visibility for all assets in the network."
"The initial setup and deployment were simple."
"The most valuable feature of the product is the Assurance Report Card, which gives us an overview of the security poster in just a simple glance."
"It allows financial institutions to compare their vulnerability management to others in the same sector."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability."
"This solution has a much lower rate of false positives compared to competing products."
"Compliance and vulnerability scans are most valuable. Compliance scan helps in validating how our teams are complying, and vulnerability scan helps in future-proofing. Its vulnerability detection is accurate."
"The tool gives us fewer false positives. Compared to its competitors, the solution’s reports are more accurate."
"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."
"Armis doesn't have a back intel feature."
"We face difficulties in integrating the product with ticketing tools like ServiceNow."
"We face issues during implementation."
"We have faced issues with the tool's stability."
"There isn't anything specific that needs improvement."
"Armis could improve its geographic spread and marketing campaigns across regions."
"Like any IT tool, continuous learning and improvement are essential for the solution."
"The solution's vulnerability testing could be improved."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve its support. I would like to see a bird's eye view of my network architecture. I would also like to see the continuous view feature in the tool."
"We are facing some challenges related to our channel."
"The web application scanning area can be improved."
"There's a lot of information being streamed out of the reports. What would be nice, and maybe we just haven't found it, would be more of an executive-type view. We still expect it to collect all this information, but we would like a feature that would allow us to show it to an executive or a director or someone like that and give them some type of high-level overview but not get into the nitty-gritty."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"I think the vendor training provided for Tenable.sc could be a lower price. It's quite expensive for the training."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The tool is cheap."
"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"
"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."
"I rate the solution's price as seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The tool is quite expensive."
"The price can start at €10,000 ($13,000 USD) for between 500 and 1,000 assets, and the price can climb into the millions as more assets are added."
"I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, where ten is expensive. It is the most expensive tool my company is using."
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"This solution's price is quite high."
"Tenable SC is priced per asset, with the basic solution starting around US$12,000 for 500 assets."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 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%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
21%
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...
What do you like most about Armis?
Armis is a straightforward and user-friendly solution.
What needs improvement with Armis?
Armis could improve its geographic spread and marketing campaigns across regions.
What is your primary use case for Armis?
Armis is a cloud-based SaaS solution designed specifically for manufacturing environments, especially for companies i...
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
No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Samsung Research America, IDT Corporation, Gett
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Armis vs. Tenable Security Center and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.