No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Secure Access vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 Secure Access
Ranking in ZTNA
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (4th), Firewalls (9th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (3rd), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (3rd), Domain Name System (DNS) Security (2nd)
Symantec Zero Trust Network...
Ranking in ZTNA
25th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (30th), ZTNA as a Service (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Access is 3.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is 2.1%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Access3.1%
Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)2.1%
Other94.8%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2788500 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Operations Engineer at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Secure access has unified zero trust and web protection while AI assistance automates tasks
From a feature perspective, I have not experienced any issues, drawbacks, or shortcomings. However, the cost of Cisco's products and licensing is high. My clients usually prefer cheaper options if possible. Mid-size or smaller businesses typically cannot afford Cisco Secure Access. Additionally, there is a steep learning curve, as it is very intensive. Someone with significant knowledge can work on it, but a new professional would have to spend considerable time to get accustomed to it. It is hard to find engineers who can work on it. Overall, we get what we pay for, as it is a pretty good feature and service. The pricing of Cisco's products and licensing is higher than competitors. If they could be more reasonable, that would help. The support offered for two years also has higher costs. Overall, the client's IT budget gets affected. It was challenging to learn because, as mentioned, it has a significant learning curve and requires considerable training to become proficient.
cto543714 - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Restricts access to applications but improvement is needed in integrations
Over the last year, I have been working with customers because it's changing and maturing. These things are rolled out in segments and chunks, not all at once. Additional internal work is often required to make it functional, such as properly configuring the active directory. This internal work can take up to three months. The process varies, and implementing Symantec ZTNA quickly is not realistic. I wouldn't recommend the tool to non-core customers because you won't get the support you need. I'd rate Symantec ZTNA a seven on a scale of one to ten. They're still integrating different pieces into their solution. The challenge with ZTNA is that different companies implement it slightly differently, with some features present in one product but missing in another. ZTNA is a tricky acronym that companies use, but when you look closely, you find that each vendor might only have some of the expected features.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The biggest benefit of Cisco Secure Access, compared to Fortinet or other solutions from Palo Alto or Prisma, is its adaptability to different network environments."
"Cisco Secure Access has protected our company against threats such as phishing or ransomware, as we have seen it successfully address various cybersecurity vulnerabilities."
"The features of Cisco Secure Access that I most prefer are easy management or manageability, and overall security."
"Cisco Secure Access is a super tool to work with."
"Overall, it improved security without creating unnecessary friction for end-users, which was one of the biggest advantages."
"ROI with Cisco Secure Access is quite good because it reduces hardware dependencies and offers many features."
"It works well. It hasn't broken. While I don't know enough about all the features yet, it hasn't caused us any problems."
"The firewall section for IDP is the most used for remote sites. It fits better with all the data we're collecting from the protection site and the information that we provide to another customer."
"The most valuable feature of this product is restricting and controlling what people have access to. If I want a contractor to connect to my network, I can give them access to only the specific things they need without giving them full VPN access to my entire network. That's the main benefit everyone gets from it. The value depends on how many users and applications you have and what you want to share."
 

Cons

"For pricing, I consider this one of the few drawbacks of Cisco; Cisco is known for its high pricing, so I would give them a six."
"In my view, to improve Cisco Secure Access, any agentic AI applications or features should be added in."
"I'm not sure of the improvements. From my point of view, it was the right decision to go to that platform."
"The licensing is a bit expensive for some features of Cisco Secure Access compared to other competitors."
"Comparing Cisco Secure Access to something like Cloudflare One, in the future the cost can come down."
"Cisco Secure Access could be improved with fewer bugs; we need to address less software bugs, as there are technical issues and errors in the software, which we are trying to resolve to achieve a more stable version that companies can use without issues, but it is a working process, and we understand this."
"If the FTD devices themselves, the Firepower Threat Detection system, those are the firewalls themselves, the individual appliances, weren't so tightly coupled to FMC, I'd probably appreciate them as a product more."
"In general, I think Cisco Secure Access can be improved. I have worked a lot with Cisco Secure Connect, which is very intuitive and easy. With Cisco Secure Access, things are very complicated."
"For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled together on the back end. Sometimes, the integrations work well; sometimes, they don't. For example, if you want to use two-factor authentication, you need to integrate that into the solution. Or if you want to accept protocols other than web coming to your secure gateway, that's another integration. Supporting different devices like Macs, Samsung phones, or iPhones also requires more integrations. Ensuring all these integrations work properly is an ongoing process and a moving target."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Cisco Secure Access have been very competitive compared to other platforms. I believe that if Cisco continues to improve costs or offers something similar to a Cisco credit, it would attract more customers."
"It is confusing. When you look at the prices, you have different licensing and years of licensing that you have to purchase. Additionally, it's unclear what service you get from those licenses regarding end-user support. We have a representative who has to walk me through it every time."
"For what you get, it's a fair price in comparison to other products."
"Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays the full MSRP. Typically, you negotiate and work with them on the pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise39
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Access?
The pricing is not too bad because it's per headcount with Cisco Secure Access. You check how many clients you have. If you have 500 users, then you base your pricing on that. It's still expensive ...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Access?
I am dealing with Cisco Secure Access products. As a consultant and reseller, I am using it myself with Cisco Secure Access. You can have tenants with Cisco Secure Access. Tenancy is obviously part...
What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Secure Access?
The AI element of Cisco Secure Access should have better guidance on the logs. To be honest, I can't think of anything else because it's quite a robust feature. My overall review rating for Cisco S...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Symantec Secure Access Cloud, Luminate.io, Luminate
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. IBM 2. Microsoft 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Apple 6. Cisco Systems 7. Oracle 8. Intel 9. HP Inc. 10. Dell Technologies 11. Verizon Communications 12. AT&T 13. Comcast 14. T-Mobile 15. Sprint 16. Vodafone 17. Orange 18. BT Group 19. Deutsche Telekom 20. Telefonica 21. Nokia 22. Ericsson 23. Samsung Electronics 24. Sony 25. Panasonic 26. LG Electronics 27. Siemens 28. General Electric 29. Ford Motor Company 30. General Motors 31. Toyota Motor Corporation 32. Volkswagen Group
NEX, AIG, Fiverr, Upwork
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Tailscale, Check Point Software Technologies and others in ZTNA. Updated: August 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.