Compare
Exploit Hound and Tenable
Tenable is best known for vulnerability assessment with a long-established plugin catalog and a large installed base.
This page describes what Exploit Hound does. It makes no claims about Tenable’s current capabilities, packaging or pricing, because those change and we have not verified them. Check Tenable’s own documentation and ask them directly.
Where we would and would not win
Breadth of vulnerability checks
Tenable's check catalog is larger and older than ours. If your evaluation is decided on raw check count, we are unlikely to win it, and we would rather say so than pretend otherwise.
What we add on top of findings
Exploit Hound correlates findings with NetFlow, honeypot telemetry, threat intelligence and Active Directory posture in one schema and one risk model, then ranks the actions that remove the most exposure.
Deployment weight
One platform to install and one console to run. For an MSP the constraint is usually technician hours per customer, not feature count.
What is included, in one platform
Every item below is implemented and running today. Nothing here is roadmap.
See the annotated product tour for what each of these looks like in the console, or the full capability table.
How to compare these properly
Ask both vendors the same questions against your own scope: how many technician hours per customer per month, what a prioritized remediation list looks like for your estate, and whether the tool can show you why it ranked something first. Ask for that against real data rather than a canned demo. We will do it and say where we come off worse.
Start with what's actually exposed.
Point Exploit Hound at the assets you are authorized to assess and see the connected picture — not another list.