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

Aruba ClearPass vs Forescout Platform vs Fortinet FortiNAC comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
Aruba ClearPass offers ROI through data security and management ease, but licensing and price concerns may cause confusion.
Sentiment score
6.7
Forescout Platform users achieve improved security, reduce workload, and automate threat management, though some question direct ROI impact.
Sentiment score
6.9
Fortinet FortiNAC boosts security, reduces costs and configuration time, offering financial benefits and substantial ROI with minimal post-sale support.
Using Aruba ClearPass has resulted in less engineering time compared to other products we've used.
The investment is huge for enterprise clients, but Aruba ClearPass makes processes easier.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Aruba ClearPass customer support is praised for expertise and efficiency, despite occasional slow responses and communication issues.
Sentiment score
6.7
Forescout Platform's customer service is praised for responsiveness, but technical support experiences vary, with some delays and challenges noted.
Sentiment score
7.4
Fortinet FortiNAC support is responsive and helpful but criticized for slow responses, knowledge gaps, and lacking UK-based support.
Portnox is one level up, as their customer support is outstanding.
We have faced delays in the resolution of production issues after raising tickets, which impacts productivity.
We have escalated questions to tech support, and I would rate the technical support an eight out of ten.
We have had experience with their technical support and must pay additionally for maintenance, support, and regional service.
They provide sessions to help with various questions.
They could do more to improve, not because of the product itself but because of the support they provide.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Aruba ClearPass is praised for scalability and integration, though some find its initial setup complex despite flexible licensing.
Sentiment score
7.7
Forescout Platform is known for scalable expansion suitable for medium to enterprise entities, despite cost and setup complexities.
Sentiment score
7.7
Fortinet FortiNAC is generally scalable, flexible, suitable for enterprises, but user experiences vary due to licensing and integration challenges.
I believe the scalability of ClearPass is rated as ten out of ten.
In our environment, ClearPass handles up to 100,000 users, which is better than some other NAC solutions like Fortinox that scale up to 25,000.
Aruba ClearPass is very scalable.
Scalability can be costly since a physical box needs to be installed for every site.
The pricing model makes it challenging as the cost is substantial due to the per-node licensing model.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Aruba ClearPass is stable and reliable, effectively handling high loads with high user ratings despite minor integration issues.
Sentiment score
8.0
Forescout Platform is stable and reliable, though some users note performance issues; support enhances overall dependability and satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.7
Fortinet FortiNAC's stability receives mixed reviews, with praises for improvements but concerns about initial issues and support challenges.
There are issues with some versions, especially in integrating with AD and SSL configurations over port sixty-three.
There aren't many stability issues, but sometimes the guest management function occasionally throws errors.
I would rate its stability as 9.5 out of ten.
 

Room For Improvement

Aruba ClearPass needs better UI, APIs, documentation, third-party compatibility, independent integration, cost effectiveness, and intuitive setup.
Forescout Platform needs better integration, AI, cost-effectiveness, support, iOS compatibility, reporting, visualization, and seamless connectivity with third-party tools.
Fortinet FortiNAC faces issues with integration, user interface, training, support, and network visibility, while being costly.
The language and policy enforcement mechanisms are not clear, making it difficult to use the product effectively.
It is also better to improve threat intelligence for built-in threat detection and prevention.
A more streamlined menu of licensing options would be helpful.
Forescout Platform could enhance its integration of AI to improve IoT and OT device security to better meet our needs.
The console is a fat client, and a web interface would be preferable.
Improvement in the interface design would make FortiNAC a better solution.
The graphical user interface (GUI) of Fortinet FortiNAC is very poor compared to competitors like Forcepoint and Cisco ISE.
 

Setup Cost

Aruba ClearPass is seen as costly but competitive, with complex licensing and valuable long-term affordability for larger enterprises.
Forescout Platform offers flexible, endpoint-based licensing for medium to large organizations, though setup costs and complexity can be high.
Fortinet FortiNAC offers competitive pricing with flexible licensing, good value, and affordability, especially in larger deployments.
Achieving the best price requires careful selection from a menu of licensing options.
We cannot mix in prices, and of course, prices are going higher.
Aruba ClearPass is a premium product with higher pricing, which seems unnecessary given its complexity.
Installing a physical box on each site can be expensive.
The overall pricing of Forescout Platform is reasonable for the functionality it provides.
Fortinet FortiNAC is relatively cheap compared to other solutions.
 

Valuable Features

Aruba ClearPass provides comprehensive network security through advanced policy management, seamless integration, robust authentication, and user-friendly centralized management.
Forescout Platform offers agentless deployment for enhanced device visibility, integration flexibility, and customizable network security and management solutions.
Fortinet FortiNAC provides strong security with device visibility, seamless integration, user management, compliance checks, and effective reporting tools.
The ClearPass solution has reduced the amount of engineering time compared to previous solutions, making it more efficient for our purposes.
The most effective feature for us is the OnGuard feature.
Aruba ClearPass is a very user-friendly solution compared to Cisco ISE.
One of the most valuable features of Forescout Platform is its automation, particularly the ability to automate remediation of rogue devices on the network.
The most effective feature has been network access management, which has been crucial for our primary use cases in the organization.
I appreciate the feature where it can connect with different vendor equipment, regardless of the network devices from other vendors.
The main advantage of Fortinet FortiNAC is its integration with the entire Fortinet product portfolio.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Aruba ClearPass is 24.5%, down from 25.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forescout Platform is 12.4%, down from 13.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiNAC is 18.9%, up from 16.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user781137 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 24, 2018
 

Featured Reviews

Abdelhamid Saber - PeerSpot reviewer
Secures the network with flexible controls and excellent support
We use Aruba ClearPass as a network access control solution. It prevents unauthorized access and allows access for users in the internal environment, performing checks and onboarding We use ClearPass to secure our environment. Before ClearPass, our environment wasn't as secure. The most…
Odai Halawani - PeerSpot reviewer
It's an easy and effective solution, especially for device profiling without agents
Forescout Platform's most valuable aspect is its excellent device profiling for devices without agents, which is crucial for our work due to challenges with agent-based devices. Its isolation and blocking actions are particularly effective for network security. The device compliance feature helps us ensure device compliance through immediate actions like updating antivirus software. We have already integrated Forescout with antivirus and vulnerability assessment tools, allowing it to monitor vulnerability scores and automatically isolate devices if critical vulnerabilities are detected.
Boaz Katabazi - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless device discovery with integration and discovery capabilities
FortiNAC is very good in terms of device discovery and integration. I appreciate the feature where it can connect with different vendor equipment, regardless of the network devices from other vendors. That's something I appreciate about it, particularly in terms of adaptability. Despite the complexity of its interface, its discovery capabilities are commendable.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
855,156 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user781137 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 24, 2018
Sep 24, 2018
Thank for your nice works. I am working on the similar type comparison between Fortescout, FortiNAC(Bradford) and ISE for a project in a healthcare organization.
See 2 answers
Sep 7, 2018
Hi Nkwa, I did some research comparing ForeScout with ClearPass. Fundamentally they do the same but in a very different ways. It is important to understand these differences and how they could help you to achieve or not what you need in your organization. I will only point these differences and not every single detail. This is based on my own experience and I do not represent either ForeScout or Aruba ClearPass. DISCOVERY PROCESS / Profiler - METHODS. • NetFlow or SFlow: ForeScout do not support Sflow only NetFlow. Is this important? Yes, it is if your switches are not Cisco or any other vendor that support the NetFlow protocol. ForeScout says: "This capability becomes more relevant in large scale deployments, where the CounterACT packet engine is limited in its "ability to detect activity in remote sites and branch offices". Use of information reported by NetFlow improves visibility and speeds detection of new endpoints." Reference: https:\www.forescout.com\wp-content\uploads\2018\04\CounterACT_NetFlow_1.2.pdf Page 3. ClearPass: NetFlow V5/V9 and V10 aka IPFIX + sFLOW are supported. Reference: https://www.arubanetworks.com/techdocs/ClearPass/CP_ReleaseNotes_6.6.3/Content/WhatsNew/NewFeatures_ProfilerNWDiscovery.htm ORCHESTRATE = Integration/Collaboration with other Systems. ForeScout: * ForeScout is able to interchange contextual information with 3rd party solutions, however the most of the contextual collaboration capabilities are available using an Extended Module option and ForeScout charges separately for this. Reference Links: https://www.forescout.com/platform/extended-modules/#cmt https://www.cdw.com/product/forescout-extended-module-for-palo-alto-networks-next-generation-firewall/4589573 https://www.cdw.com/search/?key=forescout&searchscope=all&sr=1 Clear Pass: * 140+ Integrations are included as part of the core solution. Basically, you can integrate ClearPass to anything in your IT infrastructure at no extra cost to share contextual information. Firewalls, MDM, TicketSystem, SIEM, etc.. Using build-in Modules or APIs. You can request as well customized APIs. Reference Link https://www.arubanetworks.com/partners/programs/security-exchange/ Reference Link https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/so/SO_ClearPassExchange.pdf AGENT OR AGENTLESS? Basically, an agent based solution needs a software installed, while an agentless approach don't. Independently of what NAC solution you will use, it is important to understand if you need or not an agent. When a device connects to a network, the agent software performs some actions that have been defined in a central access controller or policy management platform. If persistent, the agent performs auto-remediation functions during a connection and will permanently monitor the device throughout a session to “fix” things that may change. The dissolvable agent: a user clicks on a web portal link to download the agent, which authenticates the user and device, checks the endpoint for compliance, and allows access to the network if policy conditions are met. It then disappears until the user runs it again. ForeScout ForeScout is proud to claim that they don’t require an agent (agentless approach NAC) but this is not completely true. ForeScout needs a “dissolvable agent” for authorization & compliance of unmanaged assets e.g. Employee BYOD, Contractor Laptops, printers, CCTV cameras, Smart TVs, etc. Agentless is fine when all your devices are Windows and all of them are under your management. For none windows devices you will need the dissolvable agent to perform health check and remediation. Based on this explanation having an agent or not is irrelevant for most of the cases. there many identities sources from where you can extract contextual information to help the NAC to do his work, examples are: AD, Wireless AP, End-Point protection software, SCCM, MDM, the Switches, the Firewall, etc... To do this you need integration, this is possible with ForeScout using the extended module /Plugins and normally paying the extra cost. Reference Link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Agentless-Visibility-and-Control-ForeScout-White-Paper.pdf ClearPass Clear pass can run with an agent and without the agent. It hast the persistence option, the dissolvable option for BYOD and Guest devices. It can be easily integrated to the mentioned identity stores at no extra cost. https://www.bradfordnetworks.com/agent-based-agent-less-other-understanding-the-different-ways-to-enable-nac/ http://community.arubanetworks.com/t5/Technology-Blog/When-and-why-agents-for-NAC-It-s-not-a-Secret/ba-p/256672 https://community.extremenetworks.com/extreme/topics/nac-vs-seperate-radius-server 802.1X RADIUS AUTHENTICATION OR NOT Here is one of the major differences. Both support Radius authentication. ClearPass see it like the most secure way to protect your network and ForeScout see it like something complex that you should try to avoid if possible, in my opinion. ForeScout * says: 802.1X presents several deployments, operational and troubleshooting challenges, particularly on wired networks. * To perform RADIUS-based network authentication you need a “Plugin” to forward the authentication requests to an external authentication Sever, like the Microsoft NPS. Page 10, Reference link , you will need as well a Switch Plugin for wired network RADIUS-based deployment and a Wireless plugin for wireless network RADIUS-based deployment. All this sounds like a complexity to me. * By not having 802.1x configured you save also configuring all switches on your network. Which is not a big problem because you do this once during the useful life of the switch. * Not build-in TACACS+ - centralized remote authentication to network devices like switches, routers, etc. Reference Link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CounterACT_RADIUS_4.3.pdf ClearPass: * Is build-in CA and if you like you can use an external CA as well. * Centralizing the radius authentication make the administration and configuration very easy because you don’t have to manage the NAC and the CA separated. * No plugin is needed for non-802.1x Auth and non-domain joined devices. In this case you can enforce machine authentication and many other security layers to allow non-domain devices to safely connect without a certificate. * non-domain devices can automatically or manually be provisioned using a guest network and dissolvable agent. * Integration with the Aruba Wireless system for Radius Authentication is very easy (if you own an Aruba Wireless Infrastructure) and no extra cost. You must configure your switches to work with 802.1x. This can be easily done using a template on HPE IMC. • Build in TACACS+ DEPLOYMENT AND INITIAL POLICY SETUP: ForeScout: preferred method is: I let you in then I find out who you are. • ForeScout CounterACT propose the Post-connect deployment strategy for network visibility and access control in which endpoints are initially allowed access to the network while CounterACT profiles them to determine ownership and compliance. Access to the network is then adjusted based on profiling results and security policy. Reference link: https://www.forescout.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/CounterACT-Deployment-Guide-Wired-Post-Connect.pdf This makes sense on new deployments because the NAC can be configured transparent to the end user with no dramatic impact. My question is: What is the process after deployment? Do I let you in then I find a good policy for you? ClearPass: preferred method is: I let you in if you tell me something about you. Then depending on the roles/policies this unknown device will be moved to a quarantine VLAN for remediation or moved to a dead end VLAN. At the same time this will trigger a ticket to helpdesk and a message to the user to know what is happening and what is the next step. SUPPORT, SERVICE and DOCUMENTATION: ForeScout: • The references are very good everywhere you read in internet. Also, the expertise of their engineers. You can browse a little and it won't be hard to find references. Online support, documentation, communities (forescout Chatter), etc. Aruba/HPE The references are very good everywhere you read in internet. Also, the expertise of their engineers. You can browse anywhere on internet and it won't be hard to find references. Online support, documentation, communities (aruba airheads), etc. PRICE: This will depend on many factors. I would suggest that you consult both and make your own decision.
ZF
Sep 24, 2018
Thank for your nice works. I am working on the similar type comparison between Fortescout, FortiNAC(Bradford) and ISE for a project in a healthcare organization.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
6%
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can...
What is the biggest difference between Aruba ClearPass and FortiNAC?
I've done quite a lot of work with ClearPass, and not a lot with FortiNAC/Bradford. ClearPass incorporates a number ...
What do you like most about Aruba ClearPass?
If you are looking at the base installation, then it was a very straightforward process, which I would rate an eight ...
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
Forescout is a very powerful NAC product that does not rely on port level configuration. It can detect and block unau...
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I would rate the Forescout Device and Visibility Control Platform at a six out of ten.
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I recommend doing a compression demo. If people use it, they will buy it. So they have to see the product in place. T...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if some...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiNAC?
The support responds to our queries within two to four hours.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiNAC?
I am not directly involved with pricing, but I know that Fortinet FortiNAC is relatively cheap compared to other solu...
 

Also Known As

Avenda eTIPS
Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
FortiNAC, Bradford Networks, Bradford Networks Sentry, Network Sentry Family
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Consulate Health Care, Los Angeles Unified School District, Science Applications International Corp (SAIC), San Diego State University, KFC, ACTS Retirement-Life Communities
NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Isavia, Pepperdine University, Medical University of South Carolina, Columbia University Medical Center, Utah Valley University
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: May 2025.
855,156 professionals have used our research since 2012.