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

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager vs Devolutions Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

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

CyberArk Endpoint Privilege...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Compliance (5th), Anti-Malware Tools (5th), Application Control (5th), Ransomware Protection (6th)
Devolutions Server
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
41st
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is 3.4%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Devolutions Server is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

Sumit Chavan - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps secure the infrastructure and control users with admin rights
There are many features that are currently missing. A customization option is required for certain policies. For instance, if we need to stop PowerShell scripting, we have to create a different policy for that. Being able to create a sub-level policy within a top-level policy would be good. Currently, no user-based policy option is available inside the EPM console. We can only create computer-based policies. The database is available, but there is a drawback in not being able to create local groups on the EPM console. We only have to depend on Active Directory. This limits infrastructure security as we depend on the Active Directory team to manage user groups. If they remove any users, we lose control. If we could create groups locally and block them or set specific policies, we would have more control. Local endpoint management is missing from the EPM site. Moreover, there is an issue with policies not running as expected when we make enhancements. We have to find multiple ways to whitelist applications or enhance policies.
Use Devolutions Server?
Share your opinion
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Looking for recommendations and a pros/cons template for software to detect insider threats
This is an inside-out --- outside-in --- inside-in question, as an insider can be an outsider as well. There is no short answer other than a blend of a PAM tool with Behavioral Analytics and Endpo...
What do you like most about CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager?
The most valuable feature of the solution is its performance.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager?
I believe it's quite a reasonably priced solution. It's not very common to use CyberArk because it's a niche solution, but customers who are willing to control administrative accounts are willing t...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Viewfinity
Devolutions Password Server
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Large Financial Institutions, Government Agencies, Healthcare Organizations, Managed Service Providers (MSPs), Mid-Sized Manufacturing Companies.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, One Identity and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM). Updated: June 2025.
858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.