We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and Portnox CORE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable and reliable."
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"The portal access was very good."
"The most valuable feature is the virtual IP creation. It's our most frequently used feature."
"Stickiness is the most valuable feature of the product."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."
"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"F5 BIG-IP APM disconnects when you leave it for long enough, but that is natural for IT solutions to do. That's a little bit frustrating."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"The price of this product can be improved."
"The technical support’s response time must be improved."
"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 solution’s GUI looks very old."
"The initial setup was complex."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices. Portnox CORE is agentless, whereas Portnox CLEAR is not agentless."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"The price could be better."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"The product should consider more integration with vendors like Huawei. It should also improve visibility. The solution should offer a partner portal that can provide customers training on the in and out of the solution."
"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."
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 8th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 13 reviews while Portnox CORE is ranked 12th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 14 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2, while Portnox CORE is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) writes " Facilitates packet inspection, modification, and offloading and offers visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, allowing for pre-production server testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Portnox CORE writes "Simple UI, easy deployment but slow authentication times for devices". F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Remote Desktop Services and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas Portnox CORE is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform and Portnox Clear. See our F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Portnox CORE report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
