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

Rapid7 Penetration Testing Services vs The NodeZero Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 11, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Rapid7 Penetration Testing ...
Ranking in Penetration Testing Services
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
The NodeZero Platform
Ranking in Penetration Testing Services
4th
Average Rating
1.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (40th), Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Penetration Testing Services category, the mindshare of Rapid7 Penetration Testing Services is 4.5%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of The NodeZero Platform is 28.4%, up from 21.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Penetration Testing Services
 

Featured Reviews

Gabriel Woolverton - PeerSpot reviewer
Wide range of coverage and free
A useful improvement would be to have white papers for specific vulnerabilities readily available. It seems like they are not always linked when you are looking for a vulnerability identifier in the database. It would be useful to ensure that that information is readily available. That way, if you need to dive deeper into a vulnerability, you would have the capability to do so basically right there on the website.
reviewer2331969 - PeerSpot reviewer
Doesn’t identify threats and vulnerabilities, and the reports are quite useless
We run the penetration testing and look at the reports. The reports are quite useless. We are looking for a different product. The tool did not help enhance our organization's cybersecurity posture. The reports had a lot of false positives. They didn't detect anything. The tool didn’t identify any vulnerabilities. The solution must detect threats and vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is very straightforward. This is not a tool that you have to set up yourself. All you have to do is just access their web-based vulnerability database application, which is open source and available to pretty much anyone."
"Penetration testing and scans are useful features."
 

Cons

"A useful improvement would be to have white papers for specific vulnerabilities readily available. It seems like they are not always linked when you are looking for a vulnerability identifier in the database."
"The reports are quite useless."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Penetration Testing Services solutions are best for your needs.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
University
11%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Horizon3.ai?
Penetration testing and scans are useful features.
What needs improvement with Horizon3.ai?
We run the penetration testing and look at the reports. The reports are quite useless. We are looking for a different product. The tool did not help enhance our organization's cybersecurity posture...
What is your primary use case for Horizon3.ai?
The solution is used for penetration testing.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Horizon3.ai
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Motorola, Liberty wines, Kaman Corporation
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, HackerOne, Veracode and others in Penetration Testing Services. Updated: November 2024.
823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.