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

Forcepoint ZTNA vs Portnox 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

Forcepoint ZTNA
Ranking in ZTNA
24th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Portnox
Ranking in ZTNA
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (6th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Forcepoint ZTNA is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 0.9%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Portnox0.9%
Forcepoint ZTNA0.5%
Other98.6%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

AR
You can add multiple features on a single agent, but it's an expensive product, and its marketing approach should be more aggressive
Forcepoint ZTNA isn't well-known in the market. Right now, it's a novice, so an area for improvement in it is making the product known. Forcepoint should create more awareness about Forcepoint ZTNA because a distributor like me still needs to promote it more to customers. Forcepoint has to capitalize on, focus on, or highlight its overall approaches to Forcepoint ZTNA marketing, such as SASE or SSE, to sell the whole bundle rather than as a standalone product. Today, most customers move to the cloud, so the whole SSE or SASE approach makes better sense. Forcepoint needs to look at the whole picture. I suggest being more aggressive in marketing to boost customer awareness of Forcepoint ZTNA.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I like about Forcepoint ZTNA is that you could use it as a starting point because you have one agent that allows you to add more features. Other technologies require one agent per solution, so you'll end up with multiple agents."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."
"One of the features I enjoyed the most about Portnox was the ability to dive in with proper details on an endpoint."
"Portnox helped to free up staff time and resources for other IT security priorities and IT work."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice. We use Meraki for our switching, and it is simple to point all of our networks and offices to Portnox. It is pretty seamless."
"The Portnox dashboard is very easy to use, and the UI is simple."
"It's a stable product."
"The solution has a valuable reporting feature."
 

Cons

"Forcepoint ZTNA isn't well-known in the market. Right now, it's a novice, so an area for improvement in it is making the product known. Forcepoint should create more awareness about Forcepoint ZTNA because a distributor like me still needs to promote it more to customers."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"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."
"Allowing for a search of MAC addresses in the interface, whether they are authenticated on the network or not, would be beneficial. Currently, it only finds authenticated MAC addresses, which complicates troubleshooting when the same MAC address is used for different requests."
"As there are no agents in Portnox Clear, the customers of the product cannot download any agents on their devices, making them unsure if the product offers proper security."
"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."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Ninety percent of the feedback I received from company partners is that Forcepoint ZTNA is an expensive product."
"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."
"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 users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 cheap and ten is expensive.
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 limitations with CORE. At the end of the day, Portnox Clear's capabilities are much more...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in ZTNA. Updated: August 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.