We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and ManageEngine PAM360 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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's relatively straightforward to set up, especially if you are deploying to the cloud."
"Logs that get collected on the Privilege Management console from the agents are very good. They help us to identify the aspects from which we have to whitelist an application."
"It has some features that other products don't have yet, differentiation that sets it apart in the marketplace... Those features are a centralized dashboard and the ability to issue and revoke entitlements within minutes. That makes a difference."
"The most valuable feature is the asset discovery, which makes it very easy to locate and identify assets and pull them into the manager."
"The asset discovery feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's very easy to pull assets into the database of the solution manager."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Reduces major vulnerabilities by removing local administrator privileges."
"We can use it remotely as well."
"Deployment is very quick, and only a one-time installation process is required for ManageEngine PAM360."
"Reporting analytics is one of the areas that can be improved. It is a new cloud-based solution. So, many more specific reports can come out natively. Currently, we get all the events, and we put them in plug-ins. From there, we generate our own design of reports. If there is a much more solid or robust reporting analytics framework within the product itself, it would be helpful."
"The initial setup was very difficult. Even if you are an expert in EPM, it is still very difficult."
"It keeps on breaking every now and then. It is not yet mature. Every time something new comes up or we run into some new issues, the culprit is BeyondTrust because the agents and the adapter are not mature. The new development process goes on, and they're not able to handle things. It should be mature. It shouldn't break every now and then."
"Their technical support could be more responsive and helpful."
"There are three types of endpoints. If we need to use them in the solution, then we need to purchase the licenses separately. The tool needs to improve its licensing."
"What's bothering me, which is true of all of them, is that sometimes, the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date. I would rather search by an error code than type in the text and search for it by text because the error code means that it is programmatic, and it is known. It might not be desired, but it at least is not unexpected. If you don't have an error code, you just get an anomalous error, and if it is lengthy, it can be difficult to search and find the specific instance you're looking for. This is something I would like all of them to improve. BeyondTrust, CyberArk, Centrify, and Thycotic could do some improvements in staying up to date and actually allowing you to search based on the product version. They are assuming that everybody is on their way to release. They put out a new release, but it is not reflected on the support site, which makes no sense to me, especially when they revamp all the error codes. They all have been guilty of this in some way."
"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."
"Its feature for establishing workflows needs improvement."
"If you want a cost effective solution and very competitive pricing, you should go with this product."
"There could be improvement in latency and accessing resources for the product."
"I don't see any features associated with multi-factor authentication in ManageEngine PAM360."
"I would rate the scalability at five out of ten. It's average."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while ManageEngine PAM360 is ranked 16th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 3 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while ManageEngine PAM360 is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine PAM360 writes " An easy-to-deploy and affordable tool for access control monitoring". BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server and ARCON Privileged Access Management, whereas ManageEngine PAM360 is most compared with CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server, ARCON Privileged Access Management, WALLIX Bastion and Fudo PAM. See our BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management vs. ManageEngine PAM360 report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) 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.