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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence 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:
 

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)
IBM Security Identity Gover...
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (13th), Identity Management (IM) (29th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence 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 24.9%, down 30.3% compared to last year.
IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence, on the other hand, focuses on User Provisioning Software, holds 1.8% mindshare, down 1.9% since last year.
Network Access Control (NAC)
User Provisioning Software
 

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.
Siraz Shaik - PeerSpot reviewer
Clear evaluation and life cycle management; service center could be more user friendly
Our primary use case is for publishing and our customer has somewhere between 3,000-4,000 users. We're partners with IBM and I work as a security consultant.  This solution has a very good dashboard and the documentation is also very good. Life cycle management and governance are also good…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The valuable feature of the solution lies in its integration capabilities with other applications."
"The best feature of the Cisco ISE platform is that it is compatible with Microsoft products."
"For us and our clients, the most valuable features of Identity Services Engine are really around the rich contact sharing that ISE gives you."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility element, the ability for customers to be able to see what devices are actually on their network. Without a solution like ISE, they would have no idea what devices are connected to their network. It offers them the ability to authenticate devices via mobile."
"The most valuable thing in ISE is the adoption of EAP deep that came in [version] 2.7, so we can do authentication based on user and machine certificates in one authentication."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco ISE is its seamless integration with the switches and the entire suite, enabling wireless access and smooth client information retrieval."
"The most important feature for us is visibility in terms of user connections. It's the ability to see what devices are online for a particular user that helps a lot with our troubleshooting."
"I would rate the price eight out of 10, with 10 as the best value for money."
"Lifecycle management, governance and documentation."
 

Cons

"The integrations with the switches and the wireless controllers are not really straightforward. There is what they call the best practice for them, but it may not be what we have on-premise."
"It would be nice if it could be configured easily by default."
"The user interface could be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"It would be helpful for us to know what needs to be deployed, configured, and what changes we need to make to our devices when we don't receive the specific login which is an indication of a lack of connection or incorrect configuration."
"It should be virtualized because many people have begun migrating to the cloud. They should offer a hybrid version."
"The compliance and posture don't always work. They should make it more stable. With each upgrade, we lose some functionality. We have to wait for another upgrade."
"The opinion of my coworkers, and it's mine as well, is that the user interface could use some tender loving care. It seems counterintuitive sometimes. If you go to the logs, it's hard to figure out which one you need to look at."
"I believe that Cisco can improve the way its policies are built because it's a little complex."
"The solution is a bit pricey for some regions."
"Self service center is not always easy to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am not aware of the current price for Cisco ISE, but considering it is a Cisco product, it is likely to be quite high."
"I believe I have paid around $1,000 in licensing fees. The license is annual."
"We are running Version 2.9 because Version 2.9 of the ISE has a persistent license — it's a one-time payment. The latest version (3.1) is only available if you do a yearly subscription."
"It's damn expensive and the licensing is terrible... If you have perpetual licenses on 2.7 and you upgrade to 3, you are forced to go with Essentials. That is one of the issues that I'm seeing with my clients now."
"Pricing is not a problem for Cisco because it has a lot of features and not much competition, although it's more expensive than other products. But if I do a cost-benefit analysis, Cisco provides high quality."
"If you consider money only, Cisco ISE is not a cheap solution."
"Cisco is moving towards a subscription service, which would mean additional costs."
"If you're not going through an agreement, it's very expensive."
"I would rate the price eight out of 10, with 10 as the best value for money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
864,155 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
IGI, IBM Security Identity Manager, ISIM
 

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
E.ON Global Commodities
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: July 2025.
864,155 professionals have used our research since 2012.