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

Qualys VMDR vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd)
Qualys VMDR
Ranking in Container Security
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (5th), Vulnerability Management (2nd), Configuration Management Databases (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (2nd)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
23rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys VMDR is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.7%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
Harold Jensen - PeerSpot reviewer
Good visibility but expensive and needs better support
Support: It's often overseas and often following a script, basically asking us to redo what we opened the case with. Multiple APIs: There seems to be a lack of easy onboarding into Qualys. We had to use manual inputs and some API calls to get items in place. Dashboard: It is very rudimentary with very little customization. The Qualys Scripting Language (QSL) works differently in different Qualys modules, so when you get it working in one area you have to modify the syntax in others. User account management: We often have to give users more rights than needed just to give them what they need. Integration with the various Qualys Modules: You can tell the UI is different based on of the different teams that created them. QSL syntax same in all modules Responsiveness of some of the components: They time out, you get a blank screen, etc. Backend updates between the various modules: You update connectors and information takes a few minutes to show in VMDR or Global Asset View Connectors: Connectors have a throttling issue with AWS which causes them to frequently fail unless you manually run them again.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user-friendly dashboard offers both convenience and security by providing quick access to solutions and keeping us informed of potential threats."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has improved our security posture."
"PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"The most valuable feature is the notification system, providing real-time alerts and comparisons crucial for maintaining security."
"I find Qualys VM very robust, and it's very useful for vulnerability management and patch management. The value that it brings to my environment is economies of scale. There is no limitation on adding any endpoints. You go by the rule, and it's added once another endpoint is added to our environment. It's automatically installed, and it's less work from our end. It frees up my license automatically if I don't need an endpoint or if my machine is decommissioned. I like the dashboard displays because I don't see any duplication. The most important part is vulnerability management and prioritization. Unlike Symantec, it shows the kind of vulnerability I would want to patch first. It provides a holistic view of the kind of vulnerabilities and the ones I should remediate first. I don't have to do a scan; it just brings up those critical kinds of vulnerabilities like zero-day vulnerabilities and tells me to prioritize them. You have to prioritize these vulnerabilities first and go on with the rest. The dashboard shows me the ones that have been fixed, so I don't have to complete an aging report. The user experience and the graphical interface are good. As it's user-friendly and understandable on an executive level, it brings real value. We also use this solution because it's robust and flexibile."
"The most valuable feature is the certificate management."
"The reporting functionality is great."
"It gives a very good overview of the inventory assessment process, and it can be accessed across our company because it's a global tool."
"Qualys VM's most valuable feature is automatic detection."
"I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagging system is good for tagging. We can still use QualysAgent task ID tools even if tags aren't made."
"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."
"The prioritization feature is great. I think it has all of the advanced features that we need."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The UI has a lot of features."
 

Cons

"I would like additional integrations."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"While SentinelOne offers robust security features, its higher cost may present a challenge for budget-conscious organizations."
"Bugs need to be disclosed quickly."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"In terms of improvement for the web application console, in the older version, things were more segregated and presented in a brief format."
"Certain integration factors between different options could be improved."
"Improve the user interface."
"There's a need to upgrade or fix the potential vulnerability rate. Around 20,000 potential vulnerabilities were showing in Qualys VMDR, but none of the other tools showed them. When we checked, it wasn't the case. Support explained that even small issues were being counted as vulnerabilities, causing issues in our audit. So, the security features could be improved to identify vulnerabilities accurately."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"They have integrated with other third parties, but it is still not viable."
"If AI features were integrated, it could enhance the capabilities significantly."
"The ability to manage user accounts and give rights to the operator to know about abnormalities of applications is something that needs improvement."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"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."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is based on modules, which was ideal for us."
"It's a fair price for what you get. We are happy with the price as it stands."
"I wasn't sure what to expect from the pricing, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was a little less than I thought."
"PingSafe is cost-effective for the amount of infrastructure we have. It's reasonable for what they offer compared to our previous solution. It's at least 25 percent to 30 percent less."
"Its pricing is constant. It has been constant over the previous year, so I am happy with it. However, price distribution can be better explained. That is the only area I am worried about. Otherwise, the pricing is very reasonable."
"SentinelOne offers excellent pricing and licensing options."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"It was reasonable pricing for me."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing and licensing for Qualys could be improved."
"Usually every implementation is different and the quote is in function of number of assets."
"There are no additional fees in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Qualys is a pay-as-you-go model, so there's flexibility to the pricing."
"When you want to cover yourself for scalability, you will be charged for the number you place on the scan itself."
"It's very expensive, especially if you want to use multiple modules of Qualys."
"The solution is reasonably priced for the value it provides."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Educational Organization
35%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
The documentation could be better. Besides improving the documentation, obtaining a professional or partner specializ...
What do you like most about Qualys VMDR?
I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys VMDR?
Qualys offers better pricing and is feature-packed compared to other tools.
What needs improvement with Qualys VMDR?
They can tweak their UI since the new version seems a bit jumbled up, and the old UI was more user-friendly.
What do you like most about NeuVector?
The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution. You have to pay for the support.
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Qualys VM, QualysGuard VM, Qualys Asset Inventory, Qualys Container Security
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Agrokor Group, American Specialty Health, American State Bank, Arval, Life:), Axway, Bank of the West, Blueport Commerce, BSkyB, Brinks, CaixaBank, Cartagena, Catholic Health System, CEC Bank, Cegedim, CIGNA, Clickability, Colby-Sawyer College, Commercial Bank of Dubai, University of Utah, eBay Inc., ING Singapore, National Theatre, OTP Bank, Sodexo, WebEx
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys VMDR vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.