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

ARCON Privileged Access Management vs BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2024

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

ARCON Privileged Access Man...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privil...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 4.0%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is 3.8%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

PRAVINKHISMATRAO - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced compliance and security through detailed action recordings
We have used ARCON Privileged Access Management for recording videos of user actions taken after logging into systems. Around thirty people, including network engineers, server engineers, and application engineers, use it in the company There hasn't been a notable financial benefit for our…
Prashant Uppuluri - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides critical application control and ensures security with a flexible setup process
Regarding the feedback scenario, it's a tough question as I have thoroughly gone through the entire partner portal and library of BeyondTrust, as well as BeyondTrust University. I have also interacted with support whenever a ticket is raised, ranging from P1 to P3 or P2. Most end users and partners seem happy and content with BeyondTrust. The deployment of the solution is generally easy, flexible, and scalable. However, it can be challenging in certain environments, especially regarding management. Improvements could focus on adding more AI features to automate processes that are currently manual or challenging for end users. In some cases of competition, I have noted specific use cases where the recording of sessions was an endpoint for BeyondTrust, providing an edge for higher management. The ability to view recorded live sessions of specific users is a crucial benefit.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The session management capabilities are helpful. The session recording feature for system handling is good. It also eliminates the need to open many ports for end-users, simplifying access."
"Technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is it is easy to use and the interface is intuitive."
"It was very easy for us to move this application and database from on-premise to cloud, as well as configure new things, such as load balancing. The product is very compatible."
"One standout feature of ARCON is its ability to resolve lagging issues, especially noticeable in Linux environments."
"Session recording is the most valuable feature, as it covers compliance and it also covers our in-house applications."
"The entire conversation that is happening between the servers and the client is recorded. It is a good feature if you want to do some analysis, and for investigation."
"With this log available, we can drill down to the activities performed by the people within our kiosk. There is a great feature where in the case of Unix servers, we have our own text-based logs. In the case of Window's server, we cannot create a text-based log, so our kiosk takes the screenshot or picture of the screen when I am working. It does this every three seconds."
"I find the comprehensive Privilege Access Management features valuable, including automation, and the ability to integrate with applications and the Windows operating system."
"The user experience is good, and there are many preconfigured platforms."
"One of the valuable features is the absence of any local user in a unique system. All users are defined in the AD; communication is only between Unix and AD."
"It scales easily and the product is stable."
"The privileged access and the application control are helpful in making sure we have good, robust challenge responses. Blacklisting with trusted application protection is also beneficial for us."
"The privileged access management into sensitive systems is very valuable. That includes control from the endpoint all the way through to the managing of passwords and credentials that are used by the person to access the sensitive information. It's very useful, because nobody ever really maintains passwords for those endpoint systems. It's maintained in the Dropbox password file."
"The features related to application elevate is amazing. It helped the company to remove almost all admin local users."
"Reduces major vulnerabilities by removing local administrator privileges."
 

Cons

"The product is browser dependent. As of now, it only works on Internet Explorer from the client side. Admins cannot use any other browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, etc.) to access the client manager online."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"It should be browser-agnostic and, frankly, it is working well on Internet Explorer. It should work on popular browsers like Mozilla and Firefox."
"Hazard flow could be improved, the data compliance portion."
"I would like to see a "wild card" kind of a feature or something that would enable us to search the video."
"We would like to see support for privileged accounts used in web-based systems like Blue Coat Secure Web Gateway, VMware ESXI management tools, etc."
"This product is lacking in terms of dashboarding analytics and should have user behavior analytics. It should also have better dashboarding for executive management and security managers, which this product is missing."
"There are some features lacking but they typically are added when the upgrades are released."
"There is room for improvement in having the solution align more with standards. We're always shoehorning the product into the standards. It's not that it doesn't work for standards, it does. But Quick Start Policies are pretty close to what we need. The vendor needs to keep looking at GDPR, 27001, and 27701. That's why our clients buy the product."
"There is a need for better MQ integration with DevOps and improvements in architecture."
"We faced some challenges with remote desktop sessions."
"The weaknesses are related to the effort required to migrate from existing technologies or having no Privilege Access Management (PAM) at all to adopting technologies like BeyondTrust. It involves changes in processes and can take a significant amount of time, typically six to twelve months."
"Improvements could focus on adding more AI features to automate processes that are currently manual or challenging for end users."
"It only has limited support for Mac."
"We use a program to automate all of this, but it's not a default feature of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management."
"It should support XWindows Remote Desktop Access protocol for Linux/Unix."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is available with competitive pricing. Licensing is not complex. We calculated the license requirements by counting the number of admins and the number of devices which were going to integrate with it."
"Pricing and licensing are good, very aggressive."
"ARCON Privileged Access Management's pricing is reasonable."
"Product pricing is based on users and connections. We did not have to pay more for additional features."
"The cost of this product is very cheap, comparatively in the global market."
"The pricing and licensing model is very economical."
"The solution’s pricing is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The product's pricing is good value. Go for user-based licensing, without any limit on the target servers."
"I'm sure everyone should have the cluster environment, which means more expensive, anyway, cheaper than the other solutions."
"What BeyondTrust was providing was user-based licensing which was a great benefit from the client point of view. Recently, I don't know why, the licensing model has been changed, and that is the reason that they have lost a bit of their edge when it comes to the PAM, against our competition. The asset-based licensing, from the user's point of view, is not beneficial. The licensing should be based on the users. The greater the number of users, the greater will be the load and the greater the scalability problems. I presume that is why the licensing model has changed."
"The product’s licensing is different for Windows, Linux, and Mac. The tool’s licensing is yearly."
"PowerBroker for a Mac client is three times the price of the Windows version."
"It is relatively more cost-effective compared to the competing product."
"It was very expensive."
"Price-wise, it is very competitive. In our area, government entities and banks don't go for the monthly payment. It is a headache even for us in terms of finance and procurement to go for monthly payments. Quarterly might be more logical and reasonable, but the minimum that we go for is one year, and sometimes, we even try to compile and give one offering for three years."
"Its pricing and licensing are okay. We were in the perpetual model when it was on-prem, and now, with the SaaS service, we have a subscription model. As a customer, I would always like to see a lower price, but it seems to be priced at the right model currently, and we are trying to get the maximum benefits out of it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
57%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Retailer
3%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
In terms of improvements, I suggest implementing password rotation for service-based accounts, as that should be included.
Looking for recommendations and a pros/cons template for software to detect insider threats
This is an inside-out --- outside-in --- inside-in question, as an insider can be an outsider as well. There is no short answer other than a blend of a PAM tool with Behavioral Analytics and Endpo...
What do you like most about BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management?
The solution's least privilege enforcement has helped us ensure access is given to only the required people.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management?
Setup costs vary depending on the scenario. Sometimes we win orders, and other times we lose due to partner preferences or deal scenarios. Customers may negotiate on price, understanding that quali...
 

Also Known As

ARCON ARCOS, ARCON PAM
BeyondTrust PowerBroker, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management for Windows, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management for Mac, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management for Linux, BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management for Unix, Avecto Defendpoint
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RAK Bank, AXIS Bank, Reliance Capital, Kotak Life Insurance, MTS
Aera Energy LLC, Care New England, James Madison University
Find out what your peers are saying about ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.