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

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (8th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Man...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (7th), SSL VPN (5th), Remote Access (10th), Access Management (9th)
Netskope Next Gen Secure We...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
20th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.2%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.2%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.2%
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)1.4%
Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway2.2%
Other94.2%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Ashish Kumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers remote access control, good GUI and easy to configure
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.
Ernst (Eric) Goldman - PeerSpot reviewer
Designed to enforce architecture governance, ensuring traceable SaaS traffic
Netskope provides vigorous policy enforcement for SaaS platforms based on how we configure it, but its vulnerability management and threat intelligence capabilities could be stronger. We rely on external sources to become aware of vulnerabilities in major SaaS platforms, which highlights a gap. It would be beneficial if Netskope offered more robust vulnerability management or integrated threat intelligence through in-house development or partnerships. This would allow for a better policy setup without needing external threat intelligence to configure Netskope. Adding these features would enhance its overall value. I would suggest making some minor improvements to the interface to make it more intuitive, but those are primarily cosmetic. In terms of actual features, the only significant enhancement I could think of, besides better threat intelligence, would be for Netskope to assess the general SaaS landscape. This could include a scorecard showing the security posture of various SaaS platforms based on their track record with breaches and vulnerabilities. I understand this could create friction with SaaS providers if some receive poor scores, which might impact their relationship with Netskope. If Netskope were to harness machine learning more effectively and share those models transparently with enterprise customers, this could include making traffic data they already collect available for deeper analytics, allowing customers to gain better insights into employee traffic patterns. It could also assist with network operations by helping to fine-tune performance based on traffic flow, even though the primary purpose of analyzing that data is security-related. Providing more advanced analytics using existing data could significantly enhance its value to enterprises.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The console is cloud-based, which is something I really appreciate."
"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"I rate the overall solution nine out of ten."
"I recommend F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) to others due to its reliability, and it is perceived as critical to security infrastructure."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"The portal access was very good."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"A lot of features are useful to me, including mostly the authentication, SAML, or SSO, with no sign-on."
"There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are already relevant to any industry. So grouping the policies is the easiest part and a valuable feature."
"As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."
"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."
"Overall, the product is nice, and I like the URL filtering, CASB, and other security stacks like threat prevention."
"The solution offers good security functionality."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its three modules, which are SWG, ZTNA, and CASB."
 

Cons

"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"Sometimes when you call in support, you get someone who is just following a sheet. It feels like a runaround. You feel that you are running into that support wall."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The solution’s GUI looks very old."
"If I could copy and paste objects instead of picking and configuring them from scratch each time, it would be great."
"The main improvement needed for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is to integrate into the cloud-delivered services from F5."
"I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) does not have a direction for SaaS."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."
"Since they have the Netskope client, adding some functionality in the endpoint would be good."
"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."
"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."
"The solution could improve the features for Zero Trust Network Access. They should add more security components to that module."
"The stability of the solution to be very good. It is not the best and could improve but it is better than other solutions, such as Forcepoint."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The tool is a little bit expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The product is very expensive."
"Recently, they have simplified the licensing"
"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."
"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."
"We pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."
"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."
"The product is cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 products are more expensive than other solutions but are valued for their quality and reliability, akin to purchas...
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM ( /categories/application-performance-monitoring-apm-and-observability )) does n...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...
What do you like most about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?
There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are alread...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
F5 Access Policy Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
City Bank, Ricacorp Properties, Miele, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office
Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.