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

RSA Archer 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
7.6
RSA Archer enhances risk management, automates processes, centralizes data, and offers customization, resulting in optimized operations and financial returns.
Sentiment score
7.2
Tenable Security Center boosts ROI by reducing costs, enhancing security, ensuring compliance, and preventing breaches with comprehensive asset visibility.
It relates to the effectiveness of employees and the time taken to complete tasks manually versus using the RSA system.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
RSA Archer is praised for approachable support, active community, but needs quicker initial responses and deeper first-level assistance.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tenable Security Center's support is responsive and efficient, with room for improvement, particularly in international and standard support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
RSA Archer is scalable and adaptable but demands significant resources and expertise, suitable for large and complex environments.
Sentiment score
8.2
Tenable Security Center is highly scalable, easily supporting large environments with proper setup, despite initial network adjustments.
Scalability depends on the number of servers, including web and service servers.
The level of scalability depends on customization and how skillful our customization team is.
Scalability is a bit limited with Tenable Security Center.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.2
RSA Archer is stable, improving with updates, but may slow during resource-intensive tasks, large databases, or peak times.
Sentiment score
8.0
Tenable Security Center is stable, with minor bugs and performance issues; user ratings range from eight to ten.
Performance issues arise mainly since it is not a core service for most organizations, so the resources provided are fewer.
The tool has stability, and it allows me to automate whatever process I have.
 

Room For Improvement

RSA Archer requires dashboard, UI, automation, integration improvements, and better functionality, support, pricing, and training to enhance usability.
Users seek easier integration, improved UI, better support, flexible reporting, and enhanced features for Tenable Security Center.
While the AI features are emerging and the cost is comparatively low, it's not yet up to the market standard.
A remaining area for improvement is integration. There should be built-in integration mechanisms, for example, for organizations switching from platforms like ServiceNow to Archer, instead of custom integrations for each client.
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.
 

Setup Cost

RSA Archer is cost-effective for large firms but may be prohibitively expensive for smaller companies despite flexible licensing.
Tenable Security Center is expensive, with costs from $13,000 to over $100,000, depending on asset count and license type.
after comparing it with other products in the market, I would rate it around six or seven out of ten, as the price is relative.
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

RSA Archer offers configurable modules, workflow automation, and robust risk management with user-friendly interfaces and flexible API integration.
Tenable Security Center offers robust vulnerability scanning, user-friendly dashboards, and seamless third-party integration with low false positives.
In the banking sector, Archer has been used to automate processes such as business continuity management, transitioning from manual processes to automated systems.
This allows us to show end users and management where the issues lie and effectively demonstrate accountability and visibility in compliance.
The tool has stability, and it allows me to automate whatever process I have.
Tenable Security Center provides an overall score of vulnerabilities, comparing an organization with others in the same industry.
The most effective feature of Tenable Security Center for detecting vulnerabilities is its capability for critical mapping.
 

Categories and Ranking

RSA Archer
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
GRC (1st), IT Governance (1st), IT Vendor Risk Management (2nd)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (13th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. RSA Archer is designed for GRC and holds a mindshare of 16.6%, down 18.3% compared to last year.
Tenable Security Center, on the other hand, focuses on Risk-Based Vulnerability Management, holds 16.2% mindshare, down 26.8% since last year.
GRC
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

IMRAN ALMARZOOQI - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates compliance management effectively but needs improved interface and dashboards
The tool basically automates whatever processes you already have, so I cannot specify improvements in that regard. However, my main issue with Archer is the graphics. The graphics have always been lacking. I always need to depend on another tool to read information from Archer to have better dashboards. It is like using Linux, and it has a Linux mindset and interface. I want to use Archer for top management and CEOs, but it looks too technical, and the dashboards are not really friendly. They are bulky, like opening an old Nintendo system from nineteen-ninety. The management agrees that Archer lacks in terms of presentation and dashboarding. It is complex, not user-friendly, and bulky. The interface just looks old.
JoaoManso - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which GRC solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

Jairo Willian Pereira - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 6, 2021
Nov 6, 2021
Yes, take a look at DeepSurface. It’s designed to automate the process.
See 2 answers
JD
Feb 5, 2021
Yes, take a look at DeepSurface. It’s designed to automate the process. 
Nov 6, 2021
Clear use with the NIST compliance framework, Archer IRM 6.9.sp3.p2, use of pre-processing out of Archer and now integration with agnostic tools.  FOSS or premium brands - all depends on your supply chain risk.  Support for qualitative nice to get a bow-tie on when quantitative data works for you. Add your methods, AWARE, FAIR, COBIT, ATT&CK; all visuals.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
55%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
5%
Government
3%
Educational Organization
23%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about RSA Archer?
It has various valuable features. For example, showing us if a control aligns with specific standards or frameworks helps us understand it better and verify its compliance.
What needs improvement with RSA Archer?
If the user needs to fill data, they need to go to one page and then to the next page if they can reduce the number of clicks to perform some activities and would like RSA to improve in this area. ...
What is your primary use case for RSA Archer?
I perform all of our information security management governance and risk -related activities through Archer. My organization manages all types of audits and Enterprise risk activities using Archer.
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?
The product is somewhat pricey, reflecting its valuable features and status as a high-quality solution in the vulnerability management market.
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 ...
 

Also Known As

Archer
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Systems, Bridge Point, Equifax, First Data, Global Imaging Company, Manulife Financial
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about RSA, OneTrust, AuditBoard and others in GRC. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.