No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Tenable Vulnerability Management 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
22nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (11th)
Tenable Vulnerability Manag...
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (8th), Patch Management (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Risk-Based Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) is 2.5%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Vulnerability Management is 7.5%, down from 12.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Tenable Vulnerability Management7.5%
Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM)2.5%
Other90.0%
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.
Chethan Gowda - PeerSpot reviewer
Windows Security Patching Operation III (Cyber Operations) at CBTS
Have maintained accurate vulnerability scans and gained actionable remediation insights across thousands of servers
Tenable Vulnerability Management agents are very lightweight, and the results we get are very accurate. The solutions they provide to us, assuming if one vulnerability exists, there will be a solution. The resolution they give us in wording will be the best solution. The exploit rates and the reports we get provide a lot of information, making it very easy for us to verify.The main benefit of integration with Tenable Vulnerability Management is that there will be no lack of missing vulnerabilities when it comes to the patching environment. That is one of the key aspects of why we have integrated Tenable to our patching tools. It has a vast capacity of pushing the data to our tools due to its capability and compatibility. That is also one of the reasons why we are using Tenable Vulnerability Management.

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."
"The risk context of any vulnerability is a valuable feature; that is what it is used for and then data from different sources can be fed into it, and they have good dashboards, risk meters, and virtualization."
"A new user can easily understand the workflow, even if they are creating users for other divisions and the user is a beginner."
"The vulnerability scanning has been great as it's helped us to define some issues around the updates of some things, and some items surrounding services we need to take care of."
"Tenable.io, in particular, is quite a powerful product; it looks at your traditional environment, which is pretty much anything that is on-premises, and it also goes a step ahead and covers your modern assets, which is anything that is currently sitting in the cloud, so you get complete visibility of your entire environment and tech operation, and the ability to give you visibility across the entire tech surface is one of the biggest advantages that Tenable.io has."
"The solution is easy to use and configuration is smooth with no complexities."
"There is no burden of updating or upgrading this solution."
"It has greatly impacted us by providing asset visibility."
"The product offers good performance, with no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"The solution's most valuable feature is providing a single pane of visibility on all the infrastructure and its status."
 

Cons

"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"An improvement would be some sort of an integration with any GRC suite."
"The shortcoming of the solution that needs improvement is related to its capability to do vulnerability assessments on applications."
"The one drawback that we have found is the reports. We are still getting reports from Tenable.sc since the maturity levels on the reports are lacking."
"The only drawback of the solution is that it is expensive."
"Tenable.io Vulnerability Management could be improved with an increased number of dashboards and MSSP integration."
"The product is a bit expensive."
"t needs additional reporting and intelligence features, as well as enhancements in AI-driven detection, which is still in its early stages."
"It can have more integration."
"We'd like to see a bit more user-friendliness."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is based on the number of endpoints, so it's more subscription-based."
"The cost is determined by the number of endpoints, which is approximately one dollar per endpoint."
"The product costs us around $137,000 annually for 4000 to 5000 assets."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing cost of the product. It is neither a cheap nor an expensive product."
"Tenable.io is not known for being a cheap product."
"Tenable charges around $40 per device."
"A yearly payment has to be made toward the solution's licensing costs."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high price, I rate the pricing an eight. So, it is a pretty expensive solution."
"The solution is not too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Retailer
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 the program is such that if a company should desire to handle the installation t...
What needs improvement with Tenable.io Vulnerability Management?
I don't think that there is any very specific area where enhancements need to happen in Tenable Vulnerability Management's feature sets. The only area which possibly is not a part of the feature, b...
 

Also Known As

Kenna.VM, Kenna Security, Kenna, Kenna Security Platform
Tenable.io
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransUnion
Global Payments AU/NZ
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Tenable, Horizon3.ai and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: April 2026.
891,869 professionals have used our research since 2012.