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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Fortinet FortiToken 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
8.4
Cisco Identity Services Engine enhances security and efficiency, providing cost savings and IT consolidation, making it vital for network management.
Sentiment score
6.5
Fortinet FortiToken enhances security, reduces unauthorized access, and delivers high ROI, benefiting both large enterprises and smaller entities.
Direct comparisons with Forescout reveal up to 30% to 40% difference in cost savings.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.9
Cisco Identity Services Engine customer service is praised for commitment, but technical support feedback varies due to delays and complexities.
Sentiment score
6.4
Fortinet FortiToken support is generally good but varies in response times and problem understanding, improved by dedicated contracts.
I rate the technical support as one out of ten.
Sometimes it's challenging to identify which support team is responsible for certain issues, which is a significant concern.
Their resolution time is timely, and they provide solutions efficiently.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Cisco ISE excels in scalable environments, efficiently supporting deployments with flexibility for thousands of endpoints across various sizes.
Sentiment score
8.2
Fortinet FortiToken offers scalable user management, suitable for small to mid-sized companies, but faces hardware and migration challenges in larger contexts.
Factors like architecture, business nature, and legal limitations such as GDPR affect it.
There is a need to scale more effectively to accommodate a larger number of users and bulk users.
Regarding Fortinet FortiToken's scalability, we can purchase licenses according to our needs.
FortiToken is scalable and accommodates the needs for updates effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Cisco ISE is reliable with high user satisfaction, though some report stability issues, especially during upgrades and high capacity.
Sentiment score
8.0
Fortinet FortiToken is reliable and stable with minor sync issues, highly rated by users for dependable performance.
The stability of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is poor for certain use cases, like authentication.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is considered very reliable and stable.
FortiToken is stable, but there are some restrictions when it comes to supporting two-factor authentication in multi-factor environments.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco ISE struggles with setup complexity, non-intuitive UI, integration challenges, upgrade issues, and demands for better features.
Fortinet FortiToken users desire improved integration, enhanced features, better support, pricing, and flexibility in authentication and compatibility.
The whole setup works well with Cisco access points and Cisco switches, but when you have multiple vendors in the environment, such as HP switches or access points like Aruba, you'll find they will not work well with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).
Pricing can be more expensive compared to other vendors, and there is a significant price gap observed, which doesn't seem justified by some specific features.
Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
If I can receive it on email, it would be more flexible.
This would allow for broader distribution among a larger number of system admins and software engineers, which is currently not feasible with the existing hardware-only approach.
FortiToken should provide enhanced SMS services for those users who do not have smartphones.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco ISE offers strong features with complex, expensive pricing, but discounts through partnerships can help alleviate costs.
Fortinet FortiToken is affordable and competitive, though some regions face higher prices and unpredictable cost increases.
Compared to other solutions like HPE ClearPass, Cisco is more costly, and the conversation suggests a possible forty percent price gap compared to competitors.
The license costs can range between $50,000 to $100,000 per year for enterprises.
The cost is about 100 million Ugandan shillings, which converts to approximately $30,000 per year.
Discounts are often provided to close deals, making it a cost-effective solution.
The pricing for FortiToken is not low; I regard it as medium-priced.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco ISE provides comprehensive access control, seamless integration, and enhanced security with intuitive management for versatile network operations.
Fortinet FortiToken is cost-effective and user-friendly, offering versatile two-factor authentication with both soft and hard tokens.
There is value because it helps us secure the network and prevents certain things from happening which could cause financial loss.
This solution ensures organizations have secure environments and also supports robust policy enforcement, allowing control over who has access to various parts of the network.
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is very good at device administration.
The main use case of FortiToken is that it is a hardware-based solution, providing secure two-factor authentication for administrators.
The solution is unique in catering to Fortinet, making it very useful and secure.
It is very user-friendly and easily integrates with various firewalls, making it convenient to use within diverse environments.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
143
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (1st), Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
Fortinet FortiToken
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and Fortinet FortiToken aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is designed for Network Access Control (NAC) and holds a mindshare of 25.1%, down 30.7% compared to last year.
Fortinet FortiToken, on the other hand, focuses on Authentication Systems, holds 6.0% mindshare, down 7.1% since last year.
Network Access Control (NAC)
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Sachin Vinay - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates secure 2FA for admins, facilitates OTP generation, and enhances security
One suggestion is to develop a more user-friendly solution that is cost-effective so that a hardware-based solution can be provided to all users using VPN services or any configuration service requiring confidentiality. This would allow for broader distribution among a larger number of system admins and software engineers, which is currently not feasible with the existing hardware-only approach.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Educational Organization
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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 adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
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 someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiToken?
The solution is simple and similar to Google Authenticator. It follows time-based authentication. We use it for hardware and software in one environment. The tool offers simple and fast authenticat...
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiToken?
In my opinion, Fortinet FortiToken can be improved based on specific requirements. We will suggest solutions based on customer requirements and price availability.
What is your primary use case for Fortinet FortiToken?
I use Fortinet FortiToken for authentication and multi-factor authentication (MFA). I utilize Fortinet FortiToken's ability to integrate seamlessly with Fortinet platforms such as Fortinet FortiGat...
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: June 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.