Ivanti Neurons for RBVM vs Tenable Security Center comparison

Ivanti and Tenable are both solutions in the Vulnerability Management category. Ivanti is ranked #54, while Tenable is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.4. Ivanti holds a 0.2% mindshare in VM, compared to Tenable’s 5.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Ivanti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Tenable users who would recommend it.

Ivanti Neurons for RBVM

Read 1 Ivanti Neurons for RBVM review

406 Views
302 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Tenable Security Center

Read 54 Tenable Security Center reviews

9,541 Views
7,040 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Ivanti Neurons for RBVM

Tenable Security Center

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Ivanti Neurons for RBVM and Tenable Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Palo Alto Networks, Qualys and others in Vulnerability Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Vulnerability Management Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 841,004 peers since 2012

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

Ivanti Neurons for RBVM

Ranking in Vulnerability Management

54th

Average Rating

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Tenable Security Center

Ranking in Vulnerability Management

5th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (13th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Ivanti Neurons for RBVM is 0.2%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable Security Center is 5.4%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Vulnerability Management

Featured Reviews

Anon127

Security Analyst at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Useful for vulnerability management with many integrations

We use RiskSense for vulnerability management, and we have many integrations. The solution is deployed on cloud. We use this solution daily. There are more than 200 people using this solution in my organization Most of the features are similar to what other tools have, but the UIs are quite user…

Read full review

JoaoManso

CIO / IT Consultant at RedShift

Good dashboards, reporting, and technical support, with a low rate of errors

Parallel scanning would be a nice improvement because it would speed up the detection process. It is not possible to search for vulnerabilities and do compliance checking at the same time. Rather, they are done one after the other. The integration is very good, although it still needs to improve. For example, it would be useful to have better integration with other tools in the space of identity management (IAM). As it is now, integration with new tools has to be developed specifically, so it's not easy. We would like to see better collection capability for external data that will help to improve detection and discovery.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of the features are similar to what other tools have, but the UIs are quite user friendly. A beginner could use it."

"Their overall cost of service is pretty good."

"The solution is completely stable and operation is user-friendly."

"Tenable's most valuable features are the credential scan, vulnerability reports, and vulnerability ratings (VPR)."

"I think that this is a good solution for evaluating vulnerability in the network."

"The most effective feature of Tenable Security Center for detecting vulnerabilities is its capability for critical mapping."

"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."

"It is a very good and user-friendly product."

"The feature we've liked most recently was being able to take the YARA rules from FireEye and put them into Tenable's scan for the most recent SolarWinds exploit. That was really useful."

More Tenable Security Center pros

Cons

"I would also like to see more integrations, plugins, and user-friendly automation, similar to the multiple integration scripts that Rapid7 has."

"The solution is expensive."

"The user interface can be improved."

"The tool's initial configuration is not so easy."

"A good plugin editor would be a good additional option for the Security Center."

"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."

"The pricing is reasonable, but this could be brought down more aggressively, such as we see with Rapid7, Tenable SC's main competitor."

"Tenable has some problems with agents going offline during scanning and lag between agents and the security center."

"The solution should include compliance-based scanning."

More Tenable Security Center cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"Tenable is open-source."

"We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."

"The price of Tenable SC is expensive, we pay approximately €70,000 for the license annually. We have to pay for each IP test. The cost of other solutions is far less, such as Nessus Professional, which is €3,000 annually."

"This solution's price is quite high."

"The price can start at €10,000 ($13,000 USD) for between 500 and 1,000 assets, and the price can climb into the millions as more assets are added."

"I rate the solution's price as seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The tool is quite expensive."

"Compared to other companies or other products it could maybe be a little bit less, but the price is okay. I would say it's not very expensive."

"The tool costs around 15,000 Saudi riyals monthly."

More Tenable Security Center pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

23%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?

The product is somewhat pricey, reflecting its valuable features and status as a high-quality solution in the vulnerability management market.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Tenable SC?

While Tenable Security Center is highly effective, there is always room for continuous improvements. The reports and plugins for reports and scans could benefit from enhancements. Overall, it is a ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Qualys VMDR vs Ivanti Neurons for RBVM

Compared 40% of the time

Cisco Vulnerability Management (formerly Kenna.VM) vs Ivanti Neurons for RBVM

Compared 36% of the time

More Ivanti Neurons for RBVM Competitors

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 20% of the time

Qualys VMDR vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 12% of the time

Rapid7 InsightVM vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 11% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 10% of the time

The NodeZero Platform vs Tenable Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

More Tenable Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

March 2025

Download Ivanti Neurons for RBVM product report

Buyer's Guide

Tenable Security Center

February 2025

Download Tenable Security Center product report

Also Known As

RiskSense

Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter

Overview

Evolve your vulnerability management strategy to a risk-based approach. Ivanti Neurons for RBVM enables you to prioritize the vulnerabilities that pose the most risk to better protect against ransomware and other cyber threats.

Ivanti

Get a risk-based view of your IT, security and compliance posture so you can quickly identify, investigate and prioritize your most critical assets and vulnerabilities.

Managed on-premises and powered by Nessus technology, the Tenable Security Center (formerly Tenable.sc) suite of products provides the industry’s most comprehensive vulnerability coverage with real-time continuous assessment of your network. It’s your complete end-to-end vulnerability management solution.

Tenable

Sample Customers

Care First, City of Alburquerque, Electric Company El Paso, State of Arizona, Washington Gas

IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

March 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Palo Alto Networks, Qualys and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.

We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.