We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable product."
"With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent"
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"There are no issues with scalability. Our clients are very happy to use the product."
"Increased our insight into how privileged accounts are being used and distributed within our footprint."
"CyberArk has resulted in a massive increase in our security footprint."
"CyberArk Privileged Access Manager's main benefit is it provides secure access to our servers. There are features to capture the user activity, it provides video recording processing. If the users are logged in to the server, we can see what activities they are performing. It's a very nice tool for Privileged Access Management. They have plenty of useful services and the solution has fulfilled our needs."
"CyberArk has helped us to identify, store, protect, and monitor the usage of privileged accounts."
"The most valuable feature is the virtual IP creation. It's our most frequently used feature."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"We have seen a return on investment from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager. It provided access at a time when we didn't have it."
"Our customers have never complained about the stability"
"F5 BIG-IP APM is relatively easy to use."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"I think having a distributed architecture would certainly help this solution."
"Areas the product could be improved are in some of the reporting capabilities and how the reports are configured."
"Stability is a huge concern right now. We are on a version which is very unstable. We have to upgrade to stabilize it. It is fine, but the problem is we have to hire CyberArk to do the upgrade. This costs money, and it is their bug."
"We would like to expand the usage of the auto discovery accounts feed, then on our end, tie in the REST API for automation."
"It is easily customized, and that customization makes it very easy to start trying to shoehorn the solution into roles it was never intended to fill."
"This is probably a common thing, but they do ask for a lot of log files, a lot of information. They ask you to provide a lot of information to them before they're willing to give you anything at all upfront. It would be better if they were a little more give-and-take upfront: "Why don't you try these couple of things while we take your log files and stuff and go research them?" A little bit of that might be more helpful."
"The greatest area of improvement is with the user interface of the Password Vault Web Access component."
"The initial setup was somewhat complex."
"The initial setup was complex."
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
"The solution is quite costly."
"The price of this product can be improved."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The operational deployment is not great."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 6th in Access Management with 13 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) writes " Facilitates packet inspection, modification, and offloading and offers visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, allowing for pre-production server testing". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, whereas F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Ivanti Connect Secure, Microsoft Remote Desktop Services and Microsoft Entra ID. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access 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.