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

Recorded Future vs Tenable Security Center 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.1
Recorded Future offers valuable features like dark web monitoring, but its modular structure limits comprehensive coverage and financial returns.
Sentiment score
7.5
Tenable Security Center optimizes resources, enhances security, and reduces costs with improved compliance, visibility, and efficient management.
Through the use of Tenable Security Center, my clients achieve more efficient patching and gain visibility and understanding of security operations, leading to improved resilience and infrastructure insight.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.9
Recorded Future's customer service is efficient with varying user satisfaction due to agent limitations and irrelevant information requests.
Sentiment score
7.3
Tenable Security Center's support is generally effective with praised premium service, though initial and international support need improvement.
The customer support is frustrating and not efficient.
Longer response times and less thorough assistance.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Recorded Future is praised for scalability and versatility, though some users have concerns about value and usage.
Sentiment score
8.2
Tenable Security Center is praised for its high scalability, easily managing numerous assets and users while supporting future growth.
Being a SaaS, Recorded Future generally does a good job in terms of scalability.
I can scale it extensively with the use of agents, allowing scanning in restrictive environments and loosely connected devices.
Scalability is a bit limited with Tenable Security Center.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Recorded Future is highly reliable with a 99.7% uptime, minimal issues, and is rated nine out of ten for stability.
Sentiment score
8.0
Tenable Security Center is stable, reliable, efficiently supported, handles large scans well, with minimal technical issues reported.
Recorded Future is very stable, with a rating of nine.
The stability of the solution is outstanding.
 

Room For Improvement

Recorded Future should automate processes, simplify its system, and enhance capabilities for better threat intelligence and user experience.
Tenable Security Center struggles with customization, integration, performance, and support, needing improved UI, assessment, and management capabilities.
The Insikt Group covers a narrow range of areas, which doesn't reflect my needs.
It's important for Tenable to catch up on testing capabilities that are present in solutions like Qualys.
The reports and plugins for reports and scans could benefit from enhancements.
Translating reports into European languages is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages.
 

Setup Cost

Recorded Future's high pricing, beneficial for large enterprises, poses a challenge for smaller companies due to its cost.
Tenable Security Center offers comprehensive but expensive asset-based pricing, with complexity impacting setup and licensing, especially for smaller enterprises.
Recorded Future is expensive, with a personal rating of eight for cost.
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pricing.
The product is somewhat pricey, reflecting its valuable features and status as a high-quality solution in the vulnerability management market.
The cost of Tenable Security Center is reasonable for our company.
 

Valuable Features

Recorded Future offers customized threat intelligence, integrating diverse data and dark web insights, enhancing security solution efficacy and user experience.
Tenable Security Center excels in vulnerability scanning, customizable policies, and integrations, with user-friendly UI and predictive prioritization.
Having a layer of intelligence within my SIEM that reflects in Recorded Future, and being able to enrich the data at my SIEM, offers various angles that I wouldn't be able to see without it.
The most valuable features of Tenable Security Center for my clients are Vulnerability Priority Rating (VPR) and Asset Criticality Scoring.
The most effective feature of Tenable Security Center for detecting vulnerabilities is its capability for critical mapping.
Tenable Security Center provides an overall score of vulnerabilities, comparing an organization with others in the same industry.
 

Categories and Ranking

Recorded Future
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (1st), Digital Risk Protection (1st)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (11th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Recorded Future is designed for Threat Intelligence Platforms and holds a mindshare of 18.0%, down 18.3% compared to last year.
Tenable Security Center, on the other hand, focuses on Risk-Based Vulnerability Management, holds 13.9% mindshare, down 24.7% since last year.
Threat Intelligence Platforms
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Dr. Merrick Watchorn - PeerSpot reviewer
Traceless online searches, stable, and scalable
There is a semantic oncology dynamic relationship between how the MIGR Tech framework needs more data infusion enrichment capabilities. To be clear, what the vendor is doing is of a high standard, and my only critique is that they need to make new enhancements. I am aware that the vendor is making a concerted effort to add additional information to their repository, and it is something they actively do. The vendor has publicly stated that they will work on this, and I always pay attention to make sure they adhere to that. This does not change over time. The export feature of the recording needs to stop being so restricted. When they record in order to save themselves by operations, I would expect that as a super user, if I asked to download the dataset I'm looking for, I would not be limited in my data downloads. One of the cool things is, let's say we do our entire research and we want to save all of the materials that were returned, and that special custom search that we made, we can export that into a CSV file. The problem is it gets restricted. So sometimes when I say it's restricted, we don't get all the data that we saw online. So then we have to go and manually search for the specific thing we're looking for. I would like to have the URI and whatever value set that I search off, and for the NLP package to not be stripped out. It's like saying I want to do a Pcap analysis. Don't strip out the Pcap when I asked to see Pcap. That's what they're doing. They do this for many different reasons. One of them is, imagine if everyone downloaded datasets that are very large and it brings the whole system down.
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
848,989 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Recorded Future?
The most valuable feature of Recorded Future is how it detects everything regarding our domain.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Recorded Future?
I am not the person responsible for purchases, but it's known that Recorded Future is expensive, with a personal rating of eight for cost.
What needs improvement with Recorded Future?
Their research capabilities and the human aspect should be more effective. The Insikt Group covers a narrow range of areas, which doesn't reflect my needs. Their research should be wider and more i...
What do you like most about Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pricing. The licensing requirements can be prohibitive for managed security service ...
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where client...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Fujitsu, Regions, SITA, St. Jude Medical, Accenture, T-Mobile, TIAA, Intel Security, Armor, Alert Logic, NTT, Splunk
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Recorded Future, CrowdStrike, VirusTotal and others in Threat Intelligence Platforms. Updated: April 2025.
848,989 professionals have used our research since 2012.