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

ARCON Privileged Access Management vs Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Symantec Privileged Access ...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 3.9%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Privileged Access Manager is 1.4%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ARCON Privileged Access Management3.9%
Symantec Privileged Access Manager1.4%
Other94.7%
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…
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure management of sensitive servers and seamless applications with direct linking
The credential injection feature is highly valued, particularly for RDP sessions. A majority of customers use it for RDP, and a couple for Linux servers. The broader capabilities, including access to multiple systems, web-based applications, and clustering, have never posed an issue. The threat analytics aspect is also a robust feature that analyzes all pertinent information.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of ARCON Privileged Access Management is the recording of sessions. It has all the basic features we need to fulfill our use case."
"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."
"Video and audio logs are there for any activities that the privileged admin carries out."
"The technical support is excellent."
"Logging, particularly screen recording for Windows RDP sessions. Also, command-logging for SSH sessions. This really helps us to see what commands/changes have been executed in a particular service at a given point of time, and by whom."
"Overall, I would rate ARCON Privileged Access Management nine out of ten."
"The product's deployment phase was easy."
"By manually keeping the user logs, we can understand and manage all the operationalized tasks."
"Whoever built it from the ground up, they understand how an organization is laid out."
"It is great for identity governance."
"It is simple to implement and is suitable for medium to large-scale enterprises."
"One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements."
"The credential injection feature is highly valued, particularly for RDP sessions."
"Symantec PAM is easier to deploy compared to its competitors, such as BeyondTrust."
"It's easy to use and easy to configure."
"The DB clustering is a really good benefit of using CA PAM."
 

Cons

"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."
"Bulk password automation is not available in ARCON when compared to other products."
"If you take Microsoft hypervisor - which comes with its own interface, its own web layer, etc. - something like that also requires privileged IDs. As per our institution policy now, everything has to come through ARCON. We have demanded that these kind of advanced features also should be there."
"It should be browser-agnostic and, frankly, it is working well on Internet Explorer. It should work on popular browsers like Mozilla and Firefox."
"A few areas for improvement in ARCON would be performance optimization, ensuring smoother management."
"The solution lacks to offer a governance mechanism for operational technology assets."
"It should support the SQL Always On platform with FQDN name instead of IP."
"Sometimes it gets stuck between servers and I would like to see this improved in the future."
"Bring more technology into the portfolio and being able to collapse those products into a much more integrated way."
"Technical support was good when CA handled it. After Broadcom took over, it's not as good."
"What I hope happens with the new product CA PAM is to keep all the useful features that exist in PA, but what I’ve noticed with many new products is the UI gets polished but systems lags stability and performance or it adds additional complexity instead of simplifying the user experience."
"They need to have zero tier and active-active setup ​with zero minimum downtime, which they are working on it. ​"
"The service account management functionality needs to be extended to application pools, SQL database, PowerShell scripts, service account discovery, etc."
"The response time for support could be faster. Some features should be added: cloud-based, VPN-less, more secure, and it should be adjusted in a hybrid environment."
"An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username."
"Broadcom has neglected product development since acquiring Symantec, and nothing major has been added to PAM."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a subscription to use this solution."
"The product's pricing is a good value. It's appropriately priced. The product has all the required features. It doesn't work in some of the areas but, right now overall, it's pretty good."
"They do have some licenses, which are required for things like Linux servers. However, in my environment, we do not have Linux servers."
"I am not in a position to give any financials, but whatever we have paid, it is value for money. Their licensing model is good. They have been flexible for us."
"The product's pricing is good value. Go for user-based licensing, without any limit on the target servers."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"The cost of this product is very cheap, comparatively in the global market."
"The pricing and licensing model is very economical."
"It is reasonably priced."
"Appliances are relatively cheap, don’t skimp. Make sure you have redundancy, high availability, and enough appliances to manage the concurrent workload."
"The prices are not low, but one can ask for a discount. It’s not the cheapest PAM solution."
"Don’t go with an agent model. Don’t go with a model that has you buying a thousand different parts. Go with PAM that gives you everything, or you’ll just be paying costs of implementing another tool that PAM would have just given you up front."
"Cost-wise, CA was better compared to others in the market. ​"
"The licensing is simple and scalable."
"I would prefer better licensing options for the 20-100 users we have at a given time."
"It is more expensive than other solutions on the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
17%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise30
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
From an end-user point of view, it would be beneficial if the system could provide information about the last login. This would help identify if the server was accessed by me or if someone has pote...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Due to the nature of the solution, it is hard to gauge, but compared to competitors, the pricing is very good. I would rate it as an eight and a half out of ten.
What needs improvement with Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Recent releases need improvement in webpage management. For instance, navigating through a webpage that acts like a wizard, where I proceed to the next page and enter more information, is not handl...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
With the customers that I have so far, I help them broker RDP sessions to sensitive servers, particularly those that manage aspects like physical access. I have also done it for backend databases, ...
 

Also Known As

ARCON ARCOS, ARCON PAM
CA PAM, Xceedium Xsuite, CA Privileged Access Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RAK Bank, AXIS Bank, Reliance Capital, Kotak Life Insurance, MTS
NEOVERA, Telesis, eSoft
Find out what your peers are saying about ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.