We performed a comparison between Qualys VMDR and SUSE NeuVector based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Qualys VMDR is praised for its user-friendly interface, prioritization system, and customizable dashboard. It effectively addresses vulnerabilities and offers valuable scanning capabilities. SUSE NeuVector is praised for its wide range of features, informative user interface, ISO certification checks, and automation capabilities. Reviewers said Qualys VMDR could improve by offering more customization options and integrating more seamlessly with other systems. The interface could be clearer, and Qualys could enhance scanning capabilities for IoT and industrial control systems. SUSE NeuVector needs to expand scanning support and work on monitoring, reporting, and integration.
Service and Support: Qualys VMDR's customer service is mostly considered accessible and responsive. However, some reviewers reported slow response times and expressed a desire for more skilled support personnel. SUSE NeuVector's support is praised for being supportive, prompt, and well-informed, although a few reviewers consider the process to be complex.
Ease of Deployment: The Qualys VMDR setup is considered uncomplicated and efficient, requiring only a short amount of time. A few users encountered challenges with integration and ensuring data privacy. Some reviewers think setting up SUSE NeuVector is straightforward, while others find it complex and challenging. Integrating SUSE NeuVector with pipelines is particularly difficult, often requiring the use of custom scripts.
Pricing: The cost of Qualys VMDR varies depending on the organization's business requirements. Some find it affordable, but others consider it costly compared to alternatives. The pricing and licensing experiences of SUSE NeuVector users vary, with some considering it affordable and others indicating a need for improvement.
ROI: Qualys VMDR is highly efficient in identifying vulnerabilities and reducing risks. SUSE NeuVector provides the largest ROI for high-risk sectors such as financial services, although its benefits may be limited for some sectors, such as retail.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Qualys VMDR over SUSE NeuVector for its easy setup, intuitive interface, and robust feature set, including its customizable dashboards and comprehensive vulnerability overview. SUSE NeuVector's setup is considered more complex and challenging, requiring custom scripts for integration. Users also express the need for improvements in scanning capabilities, documentation, and integration.
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"With PingSafe, it's easy to onboard new accounts."
"They also have threat detection which maps threats. There is a feed that comes from Qualys when a new vulnerability is found. It tells us which machines are infected with that vulnerability."
"Qualys VM had a recent upgrade and the newer version is supporting the cloud."
"Tech support is helpful."
"It's really beneficial for scanning and interacting with the agent."
"It is a stable solution."
"The initial setup was good. We didn't have any problems with it."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability scanning, policy compliance scanning, and tablet for web application scanning."
"I find the solution's dashboard interesting...The response time is fine. You can pull up reports without dragging or consuming bandwidth."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"I would like PingSafe to add real-time detection of vulnerabilities and cloud misconfigurations."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"Qualys VM's scanner doesn't pick up every vulnerability, so we have to use multiple scanners to cover that gap."
"Qualys VM could improve by having more skilled support personnel."
"Endpoint stability and fault resolution could be improved."
"We face issues while scanning multiple assets."
"The tool needs to improve the adding assets and report generation features. I would like to see the policy scan of offline appliances in the product's future releases."
"I would like to see more accuracy in detections, better reporting capabilities, and better dashboard download capabilities."
"Qualys VM's vulnerability scan could be improved, especially the number of CVE numbers it can manage at a time."
"The ability to manage user accounts and give rights to the operator to know about abnormalities of applications is something that needs improvement."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Qualys VMDR is ranked 11th in Container Security with 77 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 20th in Container Security with 7 reviews. Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Sysdig Falco, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Sysdig Secure. See our Qualys VMDR vs. SUSE NeuVector report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.