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

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment vs WithSecure Elements Vulnerability Management comparison

Sponsored
 

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

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)
IBM Guardium Vulnerability ...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
49th
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WithSecure Elements Vulnera...
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
59th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.4%. The mindshare of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is 0.5%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WithSecure Elements Vulnerability Management is 0.2%, up from 0.2% 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.
reviewer1714710 - PeerSpot reviewer
Worthwhile from the regulatory requirements and analytics perspective, but is expensive and not easy to use
We are a full security base integration and application business. We help with implementation and deployments. I used Guardium to help with a cloud migration to check and do some validation for a client's data landscape and services so that they made sure that they were all secure in overall…
Use WithSecure Elements Vulnerability Management?
Share your opinion
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
40%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
F-Secure Elements Vulnerability Management, F-Secure Radar
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Salins Group, Manhattan S.A, Solita Oy
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Qualys, Tenable and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: April 2025.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.