Vulnerability management platforms for small business buyers
Asked as “vulnerability management platform”, and as “vulnerability scanning and management tool”, on behalf of a small B2B company. 53 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, fourteen models each.
Standing · first-choice share
45%
Clear leader
45Intruder09Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management08OpenVAS38others
45% of first choices, clear leader.
Since October 2026=heldSince October 2026: 45% → 45%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Intruder held the lead, ±0 points on 45%, inside the 11-point floor.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment; they sit side by side and are never added together.
Small business
Intruder45%Clear leader=heldSince October 2026: 45% → 45%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.This pageMid-market
Rapid7 InsightVM33%Contested▲+3Since October 2026: 30% → 33%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →Enterprise
Tenable Vulnerability Management54%Clear leader↗new leaderNew leader since October 2026: Tenable Vulnerability Management (54%) replaces Qualys VMDR (32% then, 11% now), 43 points clear, past the 11-point floor.Standing →
Intruder45%Clear leader=heldSince October 2026: 45% → 45%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.This pageMid-marketRapid7 InsightVM33%Contested▲+3Since October 2026: 30% → 33%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →EnterpriseTenable Vulnerability Management54%Clear leader↗new leaderNew leader since October 2026: Tenable Vulnerability Management (54%) replaces Qualys VMDR (32% then, 11% now), 43 points clear, past the 11-point floor.Standing →The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all fourteen models, for a small B2B company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince October 2026
01Intruder45%0%56endorsed leader=heldSince October 2026: 45% → 45%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.45% → 45%
Intruder45%0%56endorsed leader=heldSince October 2026: 45% → 45%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.45% → 45%02
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management9%8%36accepted challenger▲+9Since October 2026: 0% → 9%, +9 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 9%
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management9%8%36accepted challenger▲+9Since October 2026: 0% → 9%, +9 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 9%03
OpenVAS8%33%43criticized challenger▲+3Since October 2026: 5% → 8%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 8%
OpenVAS8%33%43criticized challenger▲+3Since October 2026: 5% → 8%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 8%04Tenable Vulnerability Management8%44%45criticized challenger▲+4Since October 2026: 4% → 8%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 8%
Tenable Vulnerability Management8%44%45criticized challenger▲+4Since October 2026: 4% → 8%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 8%05
Action16%0%22accepted challenger▲+1Since October 2026: 5% → 6%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 6%
Action16%0%22accepted challenger▲+1Since October 2026: 5% → 6%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 6%07
Tenable Nessus6%41%27criticized challenger▲+1Since October 2026: 5% → 6%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 6%
Tenable Nessus6%41%27criticized challenger▲+1Since October 2026: 5% → 6%, +1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 6%08
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus2%18%17accepted challenger▼−7Since October 2026: 9% → 2%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.9% → 2%
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus2%18%17accepted challenger▼−7Since October 2026: 9% → 2%, −7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.9% → 2%09
ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management2%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 2%
ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management2%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 2%Show the three products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
12
Qualys VMDR0%58%43criticized challenger▼−4Since October 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 0%
Qualys VMDR0%58%43criticized challenger▼−4Since October 2026: 4% → 0%, −4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.4% → 0%11Rapid7 InsightVM0%48%33criticized challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 0%
Rapid7 InsightVM0%48%33criticized challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 0%10
NinjaOne0%0%13accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 0%
NinjaOne0%0%13accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 0%The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one can't be told apart from repeat variation, and both are shown. Each index measures its own floor from its own repeat, over its own categories, so the floor differs from one index to the next. Both editions asked the same fourteen models. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
Head to head
Rapid7 InsightVM vs Tenable Vulnerability ManagementRapid7 InsightVM vs Qualys VMDRRapid7 InsightVM vs ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus
Head-to-head pages are published for mid-market buyers, so these open on mid-market figures, not small business.All twenty-eight head-to-head pages: the top eight products, each against each
Rapid7 InsightVM vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementRapid7 InsightVM vs IntruderRapid7 InsightVM vs OpenVASRapid7 InsightVM vs WizTenable Vulnerability Management vs Qualys VMDRTenable Vulnerability Management vs ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager PlusTenable Vulnerability Management vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementTenable Vulnerability Management vs IntruderTenable Vulnerability Management vs OpenVASTenable Vulnerability Management vs WizQualys VMDR vs ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager PlusQualys VMDR vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementQualys VMDR vs IntruderQualys VMDR vs OpenVASQualys VMDR vs WizManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus vs IntruderManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus vs OpenVASManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus vs WizMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs IntruderMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs OpenVASMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Management vs WizIntruder vs OpenVASIntruder vs WizOpenVAS vs Wiz
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
0102030405
06070809101112Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative60%
Key
01Intruder45%
Intruder45%02Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management9%
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management9%03OpenVAS8%
OpenVAS8%04Tenable Vulnerability Management8%
Tenable Vulnerability Management8%05Action16%
Action16%06Defendify6%
Defendify6%07Tenable Nessus6%
Tenable Nessus6%08ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus2%
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus2%09ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management2%
ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management2%10NinjaOne0%
NinjaOne0%11Rapid7 InsightVM0%
Rapid7 InsightVM0%12Qualys VMDR0%
Qualys VMDR0%What they warned about
Five of fourteen models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-5.4 mini, Mistral Small, Llama 4 Maverick, Qwen 3.7 Flash, Kimi K2, GLM 4.7 FlashX, MiniMax M2.5 and GPT-6 Luna changed. A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
Qualys VMDR58%
25 of 43 labels negative · 13 of 14 models · 7 hard negative
“the asset-based, per-host pricing and the operational overhead is the pattern that makes Qualys VMDR and similar VMDR suites costly for a lean IT team” Muse Glimmer 30B, negative prompt
Tenable Vulnerability Management44%
20 of 45 labels negative · 12 of 14 models · 5 hard negative
“Primary concern: High cost — starts around $4,000/year for 100 assets... Better suited for organizations with dedicated security teams” MiniMax M2.5, negative prompt
OpenVAS33%
14 of 43 labels negative · 10 of 14 models · 1 hard negative
“Tools like OpenVAS (Greenbone) are popular because they are free, but they are notoriously difficult to maintain.” Qwen 3.7 Flash, negative prompt
Rapid7 InsightVM48%
16 of 33 labels negative · 8 of 14 models · 3 hard negative
“Avoid traditional enterprise platforms (Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable One)” Gemini 3.5 Flash, budget prompt
What they cite
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted.
Sites the answers cite
74 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 14 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 790 links across 166 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. 12 of the 252 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category; the method page measures whether that reading tilts an answer.
40 answers · 55 citations · 11 models
vendor site · G230 answers · 51 citations · 13 models
30 answers · 30 citations · 10 models
29 answers · 32 citations · 11 models
25 answers · 25 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Defendify21 answers · 27 citations · 9 models
19 answers · 24 citations · 8 models
vendor site · Tenable17 answers · 30 citations · 6 models
vendor site · Intruder17 answers · 21 citations · 8 models
vendor site · Sprinto17 answers · 17 citations · 10 models
15 answers · 16 citations · 8 models
vendor site · Vicarius14 answers · 16 citations · 10 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
30 answers · 10 models
28 answers · 9 models
25 answers · 9 models
23 answers · 10 models
21 answers · 9 models
21 answers · 9 models
17 answers · 10 models
15 answers · 8 models
13 answers · 9 models
13 answers · 6 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best vulnerability management platform”, “vulnerability management platform”, “vulnerability management platforms”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days | Best Google position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intruder intruder.io | 45% | 291 | 27,100 | 8,557 | 49,562 | 43 | ||
| Microsoft Defender parent site Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management 9%, Microsoft Defender for Business / Endpoint 2% | 11% | 98 | 18,100 | 3,525 | ||||
| OpenVAS openvas.org | 8% | 71 | 3,600 | 229 | 3,099 | |||
| Tenable tenable.com Tenable Vulnerability Management 8% | 8% | 154 | 27,100 | 1,194 | 187,567 company | $9,764 | 62 | 1 |
| Action1 action1.com | 6% | 255 | 8,100 | 87 | 18,854 | $3,801 | 48 | |
| Defendify defendify.com | 6% | 34 | ||||||
| Tenable parent site Tenable Nessus 6% | 6% | 66 | 27,100 | 1,194 | ||||
| Microsoft Defender microsoft.com Microsoft Defender for Cloud 4% | 4% | 659 | 18,100 | 3,525 | 145,358,109 company | $12,455 | 103 | |
| ManageEngine parent site ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus 2% | 2% | 49 | 8,100 | 675 | ||||
| ESET eset.com ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management 2% | 2% | 15 | 18,100 | 1,812 | 637,959 company | $4,397 | 75 |
Google's top ten for the three searches hold 18 sites; 1 of them are among the sites the models cited here (tenable.com). The first result for “best vulnerability management platform” is surecloud.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best vulnerability management platform for a small B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which vulnerability scanning and management tool would you recommend to a small business that sells to other businesses?”Comparative“What are the top vulnerability management platforms for a small team and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best vulnerability management platform for a small company with a tight budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 30 person company evaluating a vulnerability management platform. What should we look at?”Negative“Which vulnerability management platforms should a small business avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Haiku 4.5IntruderOpenVAS, Tenable NessusChangedIntruderagainst: Qualys VMDRIntruderno first choiceagainst: IBM Security Vulnerability Scanner, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR, Tanium, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Vulcan Cyber
Three alternatives
Automox, NinjaOne, OpenVASTwo alternatives
Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVMFour alternatives
Automox, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVAS, WizTwo alternatives
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, OpenVASGPT-5.4 miniTenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDRQualys VMDR for Small BusinessChangedRapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management / NessusOpenVASno first choiceagainst: ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Security Center, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Two alternatives
Action1, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementTwo alternatives
Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable NessusThree alternatives
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDRTwo alternatives
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementGemini 3.5 FlashIntruderIntruderHeldagainst: OpenVASIntruderagainst: Tenable Vulnerability ManagementIntruder, Wazuhagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable OneMicrosoft Defender for Business / Endpointagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: Nmap, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable One, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Nine alternatives
Amazon Inspector, CrowdStrike Falcon Spotlight, GitHub Dependabot, Google Security Command Center, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Snyk, Tenable Vulnerability Management, WizThree alternatives
Qualys VMDR, Snyk, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementSix alternatives
Action1, Aikido Security, Automox, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Snyk, WizSix alternatives
Aikido Security, ConnectSecure, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, OpenVAS, Tenable Nessus, runZeroEight alternatives
Action1, Aikido Security, Automox, CrowdStrike Falcon Exposure Management, Intruder, SentinelOne, Syxsense, Vicarius vRxPerplexity SonarIntruderagainst: Tenable Vulnerability ManagementIntruderHeldagainst: Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementIntruder, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plusagainst: Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Managementno first choiceagainst: OpenVAS, Orca Security, Prisma Cloud, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, RiskWatch, Tenable Nessus, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Trivy, Wiz
Five alternatives
Action1, Aikido Security, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, PDQThree alternatives
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVASOne alternative
PDQThree alternatives
Intruder, OpenVAS, Tenable NessusGrok 4.20Tenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDRTenable Vulnerability ManagementHeldagainst: OpenVASTenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: CrowdStrike, Ivanti Neurons for Vulnerability Management, OpenVASAction1against: Ivanti Neurons for Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Managementno first choiceagainst: OpenVAS, Prisma Cloud, Wizagainst: Checkmarx, CyberCNS, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Qualys VMDR, Roboshadow, Snyk, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Veracode
Two alternatives
Action1, ESET Vulnerability & Patch ManagementThree alternatives
Intruder, NinjaOne, WizFour alternatives
ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management, NinjaOne, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVMTwo alternatives
OpenVAS, runZeroMistral SmallIntruder, Tenable NessusIntruderChangedDefendify, Intruderagainst: OpenVASMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Managementno first choiceagainst: ConnectSecure, Cyrisma, Defender, Nodeware, Palo Alto Networks Cortex Cloud
Two alternatives
Defendify, NinjaOneThree alternatives
NinjaOne, OpenVAS, Tenable NessusFive alternatives
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, NinjaOne, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementTwo alternatives
Action1, IntruderDeepSeek V4 FlashIntruderagainst: Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable NessusIntruderHeldagainst: Tenable NessusIntruder, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Managementagainst: OpenVAS, Rapid7 InsightVMIntruder, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementIntruderagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: ConnectSecure, Cyrisma, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Three alternatives
Action1, Defendify, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementThree alternatives
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDRFour alternatives
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementTwo alternatives
Action1, OpenVASTwo alternatives
Automox, DefendifyLlama 4 MaverickIntruderagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementESET Vulnerability & Patch ManagementChangedDefendifyMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Managementno first choiceagainst: ConnectSecure, Cyrisma, Defender, Heimdal, Nodeware
Four alternatives
Intruder, Invicti, NinjaOne, runZeroTwo alternatives
Intruder, NetsparkerTwo alternatives
Defendify, IntruderQwen 3.7 FlashMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementTenable NessusChangedIntruderIntruderTenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDRagainst: OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Network Security
Three alternatives
ESET Essential Security, Intruder, OpenVASFour alternatives
CISA Cyber Hygiene, Intruder, Invicti, SnykFour alternatives
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVAS, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementThree alternatives
Heimdal Patch & Asset Management, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVASThree alternatives
Ordr, Oxide, Rapid7 InsightVMKimi K2Defendify, Intruderagainst: Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable NessusIntruderChangedTenable Vulnerability ManagementOpenVASagainst: Tenable NessusIntruderagainst: ConnectSecure, Cyrisma, OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management
One alternative
Action1Two alternatives
OpenVAS, Tenable NessusFour alternatives
Detectify, Intruder, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVMTwo alternatives
Action1, IntruderFour alternatives
Automox, Defendify, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, NinjaOneGLM 4.7 FlashXIntruderMicrosoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementChangedIntruderagainst: OpenVASAction1no first choiceagainst: Orca Security, Palo Alto Cortex, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Three alternatives
ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management, NinjaOne, Tenable NessusFour alternatives
Intruder, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability Management, WizSix alternatives
Defendify, ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, Qualys VMDR, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementTwo alternatives
Greenbone OpenVAS, IntruderMiniMax M2.5Defendify, Intruderagainst: Tenable Vulnerability Managementno first choiceChangedDefendify, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Managementagainst: CrowdStrike Falcon Spotlight, Qualys VMDRIntruder, OpenVASno first choiceagainst: Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Two alternatives
Action1, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementThree alternatives
Intruder, OpenVAS, Rapid7 InsightVMOne alternative
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager PlusGPT-6 LunaMicrosoft Defender for Cloudagainst: Tenable NessusAction1ChangedTenable Vulnerability Managementagainst: Qualys VMDRMicrosoft Defender for Cloudagainst: Tenable Nessusno first choiceagainst: OpenVAS, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Nessus
Two alternatives
Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementOne alternative
ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager PlusFour alternatives
Intruder, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, OpenVAS, Rapid7 InsightVMTwo alternatives
OpenVAS, Qualys VMDR for Small BusinessMuse Glimmer 30BIntruderIntruderHeldagainst: Tenable NessusDefendify, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability ManagementDefendify, Intruderno first choiceagainst: Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Tenable One, Tenable Vulnerability Management
Four alternatives
Defendify, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, Qualys VMDR, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementThree alternatives
CISA Cyber Hygiene, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, VulScanEight alternatives
Greenbone OPENVAS, Intruder, ManageEngine Vulnerability Manager Plus, NinjaOne, Qualys VMDR, Sprinto, Tenable Nessus, Tenable Vulnerability ManagementThree alternatives
Action1, Detectify Deep Scan, OpenVASBold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency.
Eighty-four rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct recommendation | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 19:25 | yes | 10 | 9 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 10:02 | yes | 5 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 11:21 | no | 0 | 15 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 09:14 | yes | 10 | 3 s |
| Direct recommendation | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:28 | yes | 5 | 13 s |
| Direct recommendation | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 12:32 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Direct recommendation | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 16:37 | yes | 22 | 32 s |
| Direct recommendation | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 12:44 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Direct recommendation | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 14:28 | yes | 5 | 22 s |
| Direct recommendation | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 16:07 | yes | 14 | 28 s |
| Direct recommendation | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 13:58 | yes | 24 | 29 s |
| Direct recommendation | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 09:20 | yes | 5 | 38 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 11:46 | yes | 4 | 13 s |
| Direct recommendation | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 08:35 | yes | 12 | 15 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 12:14 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 12:47 | yes | 3 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 12:44 | no | 0 | 15 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 13:00 | yes | 10 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 18:28 | yes | 5 | 6 s |
| Paraphrase | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 19:12 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 15:37 | yes | 22 | 24 s |
| Paraphrase | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 19:37 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Paraphrase | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 19:12 | yes | 5 | 27 s |
| Paraphrase | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 15:19 | yes | 19 | 26 s |
| Paraphrase | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 09:43 | yes | 10 | 44 s |
| Paraphrase | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 12:10 | no | 0 | 13 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 15:42 | yes | 2 | 12 s |
| Paraphrase | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 15:26 | yes | 14 | 24 s |
| Comparative | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 10:43 | yes | 9 | 10 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 17:16 | yes | 5 | 7 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 17:38 | yes | 5 | 25 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 13:10 | yes | 10 | 5 s |
| Comparative | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:47 | yes | 5 | 16 s |
| Comparative | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 16:32 | yes | 5 | 7 s |
| Comparative | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 19:09 | yes | 22 | 45 s |
| Comparative | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 10:25 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Comparative | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 13:48 | yes | 5 | 39 s |
| Comparative | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 16:51 | yes | 15 | 28 s |
| Comparative | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 12:48 | yes | 24 | 48 s |
| Comparative | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 18:19 | yes | 9 | 34 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 15:11 | yes | 6 | 23 s |
| Comparative | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 10:46 | yes | 15 | 28 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 09:07 | yes | 10 | 8 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 17:39 | yes | 6 | 6 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 12:42 | yes | 15 | 20 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 19:26 | yes | 10 | 3 s |
| Budget constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:22 | yes | 10 | 12 s |
| Budget constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 19:00 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Budget constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 09:25 | yes | 23 | 17 s |
| Budget constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 16:53 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Budget constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 10:34 | yes | 5 | 28 s |
| Budget constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 16:54 | yes | 15 | 26 s |
| Budget constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 17:44 | yes | 25 | 188 s |
| Budget constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 17:26 | yes | 5 | 28 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 13:06 | yes | 4 | 13 s |
| Budget constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 08:42 | yes | 12 | 17 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 12:33 | no | 0 | 6 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 19:22 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 19:36 | yes | 13 | 26 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 08:46 | yes | 10 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:28 | yes | 5 | 11 s |
| Scale constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 08:36 | no | 0 | 6 s |
| Scale constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 10:11 | yes | 22 | 46 s |
| Scale constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 13:34 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Scale constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 16:26 | no | 0 | 33 s |
| Scale constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 16:05 | yes | 15 | 25 s |
| Scale constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 13:39 | yes | 9 | 90 s |
| Scale constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 10:22 | no | 0 | 70 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 10:16 | yes | 3 | 12 s |
| Scale constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:23 | yes | 14 | 20 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 15:23 | yes | 19 | 8 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 18:24 | yes | 4 | 6 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 09:44 | no | 0 | 16 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 18:13 | yes | 10 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 17:25 | yes | 9 | 12 s |
| Negative framing | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 18:22 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 19:34 | yes | 23 | 42 s |
| Negative framing | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 09:32 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Negative framing | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 12:53 | yes | 20 | 76 s |
| Negative framing | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 19:06 | yes | 24 | 35 s |
| Negative framing | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 11:47 | yes | 21 | 43 s |
| Negative framing | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 12:07 | yes | 10 | 38 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 14:21 | yes | 5 | 18 s |
| Negative framing | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:44 | yes | 23 | 32 s |
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
ESET read as ESET Vulnerability & Patch Management
Ivanti read as Ivanti Neurons for Vulnerability Management
Orca read as Orca Security
Qualys read as Qualys VMDR
Rapid7 read as Rapid7 InsightVM
Tenable read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Tenable (Nessus / Tenable One) read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Tenable (Nessus / Tenable.io / VM) read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Tenable (Nessus Professional, Tenable.sc, Tenable.io) read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Tenable (Tenable.io / Nessus) read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Tenable One / Tenable Vulnerability Management read as Tenable Vulnerability Management
Vicarius read as Vicarius vRx
Vicarius (vRx) read as Vicarius vRx
Unresolved, counted raw
CyberCNS
Detectify Deep Scan
ESET Essential Security
Greenbone OPENVAS
Greenbone OpenVAS
Holm Security
IBM Security Vulnerability Scanner
Oxide
Qualys VMDR for SMEs
Tenable Network Security (Nessus)
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.