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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Portnox vs Sophos Network Access Control 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is 25.1%, down from 30.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 3.9%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sophos Network Access Control is 1.7%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

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.
Scott Kerr - PeerSpot reviewer
It is seamless and integrates well with our Azure setup
We use devices like PLCs and controllers, and when we receive a request to allow one on the network, we bypass typical authentication, associate it with a group account, and push it to a firewalled VLAN. However, problems arise when the same MAC address is requested for a different project. Our current system only finds authenticated MAC addresses, making it difficult to troubleshoot when the same device is used for multiple purposes. Ideally, we should be able to search for any MAC address in the database, regardless of its authentication status, to see all its associated groups and potential conflicts.
Vishal Deshwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical support excels but hardware enhancements are needed for faster processing
The best features in Sophos Network Access Control are fewer than FortiNAC and Cisco ISE, but when discussing budget and customer support, different vendors have different perspectives. Cisco is better in support, FortiNAC is better in security, and different vendors maintain different perspectives. I utilized the device quarantine feature around eight months ago. It is specifically for when any malicious or harmful file comes to the system. Through NAC, we can put it in quarantine, and if anything comes or goes from this system, it will be monitored continuously. We can define these parameters as needed. The role-based access controls feature of Sophos Network Access Control allows persons at different positions in an organization to have different types of roles. We can give them full access as an administrator, provide some network access, or give users only read-only access. This depends on the user's requirements and the position they hold within the organization, allowing us to grant roles according to their post. The integration capabilities of Sophos Network Access Control are good, as it can easily integrate with other solutions and vendors.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ISE's most valuable feature is integration between IT and OTs."
"When you push out the policy, it is able to populate the entire network at one time."
"I found the CMDB Direct Connect in Cisco ISE 3.2 the most promising feature for my use case."
"RADIUS is the best feature because it supplies authentication to our entire campus."
"A lot of customers use a third party to manage their guest Wi-Fi. Cisco ISE presents the ability to bring that in-house so that customers can have full control over it, change the branding, and get extra telemetry from it and the user data. It works really well for our customers."
"For customers, it's great. It has a GUI, so the customers themselves can edit ACLs or even modify the policies. It's also an all-in-one solution with RADIUS and TACACS."
"We found that the most valuable features associated with this tool are posture assessment, policy management, VLAN assignments, guest assignment, and BYOD services. In addition to these services, the Cisco IOS software switch configuration feature is another very valuable aspect of the policy and compliance solution."
"The best features are the scalability and the license structure."
"The Portnox dashboard is very easy to use, and the UI is simple."
"One of the features I enjoyed the most about Portnox was the ability to dive in with proper details on an endpoint."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"Previous to the deployment we didn't have complete visibility of all the endpoints, all the devices that are connected to the network. But with the deployment of portnox, we could see all the devices and where they're connecting. We can equally segregate and apply different rules, policies to each location that we didn't monitor specifically."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check everything."
"Sophos' technical support is great, very fast and responsive, and they always know how to fix the problem."
"The pricing is very reasonable and you can negotiate on the price."
"I found all Sophos Network Access Control features valuable, but IP blocking is the most useful."
"What Sophos has done is integrate almost the entire OSI layer infrastructure. It gives me visibility across my infrastructure. It gives me visibility into all the mobile devices that are on my network and into the security I have on those mobile devices."
"The platform's most valuable features include robust reporting and analytics capabilities, which provide deep insights into our sales performance and customer behavior."
"The user interface makes it easy to configure and use."
"The initial setup is very easy."
 

Cons

"The initial setup process is complex since there are so many big components."
"The learning curve is steep and the initial setup is complex."
"The solution can lag somewhat as we have a large database."
"The solution could be more secure."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"Some of ISE's features need to be more agile. For example, we couldn't integrate our data because Cisco needs your data to be in its own format."
"It is a good product, but in order to use all of the functions of the product, you must have a good understanding of the product. You must know how to use and manage it. It is a little bit complicated to configure and manage. It must be simplified to make it easy to manage for end users. In the initial stage, we found ISE complicated for end users. It was not easy to manage it or to write authentication and authorization protocol. They must improve its management and make it easy for end users. The monitoring and reporting capabilities can be improved because end users want to quickly see what is happening in their network. There were some restrictions in working with other vendors. It should also have a better and easy integration with other vendors."
"Cisco ISE could be simplified somewhat. I would also prefer certificate-based authentication over confirmation-based authentication for all the processes. It's possible for us to do a workaround, but the process needs to be simplified."
"The Wi-Fi integration could be done better from their end. If there is an improvement, it should be around having more functions on the integration with the Wi-Fi controller I used, which was a UniFi controller, also on-prem."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"However, problems arise when the same MAC address is requested for a different project. Our current system only finds authenticated MAC addresses, making it difficult to troubleshoot when the same device is used for multiple purposes."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"Sophos Network Access Control needs improvement regarding its slow interface, loading time, and reporting."
"Sophos Network Access Control requires a lot of resources to work, which is an area for improvement. Pricing could also be improved because it's costly."
"The solution could offer more useful documentation."
"The solution could increase the integration with other platforms or other systems. This would be very useful."
"Users are not controlled by role-based access; it's basically device-based control. The definition of role-based control is a little vague here because on the cloud level, it regulates access rather than tasks."
"The solution can improve the for applying policies. They can be complex depending don't the group they are applied to."
"I would like to be able to fully customize the reports."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is fair for what it does."
"I believe I have paid around $1,000 in licensing fees. The license is annual."
"It's an expensive solution when compared to other vendors."
"The price of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is expensive and we are thinking about changing to FortiGate."
"It is fairly expensive and that's part of why we have implemented it in the type of 'hack' that we did, to service multiple clients."
"If you go directly with Cisco for the implementation it's very, very expensive."
"Cisco has actually transitioned to a lot of subscription models, fees, and licenses."
"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."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"It is not bad. It is a bit on the high side, but considering the cloud features and how much it costs to run the instance in the cloud, it is not unreasonable. We do have RADIUS servers for the US, Asia, and Europe."
"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
"Portnox CORE's pricing is adequate and cheaper compared to other complex solutions. Its licensing costs are yearly and include support. Cost is calculated per device."
"The vendor price is fair."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."
"It provides a moderate pricing option for all of its features and benefits."
"Sophos Network Access Control is very cheap compared to other solutions like Cisco, Barracuda, and Palo Alto."
"Sophos Network Access Control is costly but has a similar price range as CrowdStrike and Check Point. The product can get more market share if Sophos can play around with Sophos Network Access Control pricing and improve it."
"It is quite expensive."
"Sophos Network Access Control is an expensive solution."
"I rate the price of Sophos Network Access Control a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
862,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Educational Organization
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
7%
Construction Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
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 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 cann...
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 Portnox CORE?
It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox CORE?
It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle, so I'll probably give it a seven out of ten, where one is che...
What needs improvement with Portnox CORE?
We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitati...
What do you like most about Sophos Network Access Control?
Sophos Network Access Control has a useful interface, and I like its dashboard, which is very useful for us to check ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Network Access Control?
I am not able to say much on the financial specifics as it pertains to the sales unit.
What needs improvement with Sophos Network Access Control?
Sophos Network Access Control could be improved by having an ASIC chip similar to FortiNAC, as this would provide bet...
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not 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
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Rushmoor Borough Council
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: June 2025.
862,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.