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

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Rapid7 InsightVM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cisco Vulnerability Managem...
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
19th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th)
Rapid7 InsightVM
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Risk-Based Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is 2.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 InsightVM is 10.8%, down from 13.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Rapid7 InsightVM10.8%
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)2.7%
Other86.5%
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

AshishPaliwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-employed at Self-employed
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.
FL
Senior Manager - Pre-Sales at Trillium Information Security Systems
Offers robust compliance features but needs improved automation in remediation
The automation capability remediation needs improvement. The current process requires manually telling IT teams to remediate vulnerabilities, and then they update the status of these vulnerabilities in the platform. This basic feature that Rapid7 calls an automated remediation process is actually manual. We can update the status of vulnerabilities in the Rapid7 InsightVM platform and collectively see how many vulnerabilities we have identified and how many are remediated by our IT team. More automation in the remediation feature is a basic demand from many customers. The remediation part and vulnerability identification of network devices or rigid devices are not currently supported by Rapid7 InsightVM. More integration and automation are the two areas Rapid7 needs to improve in their product.

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."
"InsightVM offers a robust platform for identifying, prioritizing, and addressing vulnerabilities across an organization's IT infrastructure."
"The solution is good because it has a lot of options."
"When it comes to the process, installation is very easy and does not take long."
"Has great reporting features."
"The solution works well."
"The discovery and prioritization of vulnerabilities."
"The cost is what is most valuable. Compared to the other products on the market, the cost is more palatable."
"The solution is very user friendly and easy to manage."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"This solution creates false-positives which can cause issues with reporting."
"Rapid7 InsightVM could be easier to use for those who are using it for the first time."
"The product's documentation could be enhanced with clearer and more detailed instructions."
"We found that after you passed an endpoint, it didn't always reflect it in the next scan. I'm not sure if it was a glitch or some issue with the product's software. That was never clear. That was always an issue and something that definitely needed improvement."
"Rapid7 InsightVM, has impressive capabilities, especially when it comes to managing video equipment. However, we've noticed that Rapid7 also offers a cloud solution called CloudSec, and we don't have that. We think it would be better if InsightVM had all the features for both on-premise and cloud management."
"There are certain limitations because of the product being used on a hybrid model. Rapid7 InsightVM doesn't offer a solution purely in the cloud."
"The team needs to improve the speed and focus on the new bandwidth feed. Sometimes, it takes a while to scan, especially with new updates."
"I’d like to see Rapid7 InsightVM improve by adding a knowledge base similar to what Qualys offers. This would help us easily check and search for vulnerabilities using Rapid7 IDs associated with CVs or CVSS. From a features perspective, everything was fine at the time, and the security features of Rapid7 InsightVM were effective."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
"I do not have experience with the pricing of the solution."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"The solution is a bit more reasonably priced than other products."
"This solution is expensive, but it's fine for us as we have an open budget for security solutions. Protection and having the system secured is more important."
"The product is cheaper than the other similar tools available in the market."
"Pricing is reasonable because we pay according to asset usage. We can define our assets and sites according to our preference."
"In some cases, we procure the licenses. In some cases, the customers directly buy the license from Rapid7."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Retailer
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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. You can easily prioritize vulnerabilities using attacker analytics. Overall, Rapid...
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?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Rapid 7 is that they are generally pretty good in terms of their pricing, their setup cost is reasonable, and licensing is among the easier...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
InsightVM, NeXpose
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
ACS, Acosta, AllianceData, amazon.com, biogen idec, CBRE, CATERPILLAR, Deloitte, COACH, GameStop, IBM
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Tenable, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: February 2026.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.