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

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Ivanti Neurons for RBVM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (18th)
Ivanti Neurons for RBVM
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (54th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is designed for Risk-Based Vulnerability Management and holds a mindshare of 3.1%, up 1.5% compared to last year.
Ivanti Neurons for RBVM, on the other hand, focuses on Vulnerability Management, holds 0.4% mindshare, down 0.5% since last year.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

AshishPaliwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers contextual prioritization and risk-based remediation of vulnerability
An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite. There are a lot of GRC suites available, like Archer, MetricStream, Rsam, Protiviti, for example. So how would a solution like this work if my company has already invested thousands or maybe millions in a GRC solution? Do I still need it and how does it fit into an existing SAP environment? There could be interoperability, having more data sources, integrating Splunk, Qualys, FireEye, Rapid7, Carbon Black. I'm sure all that can be done to an extent, with a little more insight and a little more accuracy on the industry numbers and trends. I'd like the solution to offer any sort of assistance in any way with the remediation part, not just identification of vulnerability risk, and that is second.
Anon127 - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful for vulnerability management with many integrations
We use RiskSense for vulnerability management, and we have many integrations.  The solution is deployed on cloud. We use this solution daily. There are more than 200 people using this solution in my organization Most of the features are similar to what other tools have, but the UIs are quite user…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature."
"Most of the features are similar to what other tools have, but the UIs are quite user friendly. A beginner could use it."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"I would also like to see more integrations, plugins, and user-friendly automation, similar to the multiple integration scripts that Rapid7 has."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
25%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
RiskSense
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
Care First, City of Alburquerque, Electric Company El Paso, State of Arizona, Washington Gas
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.