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

Ivanti NAC vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 2026

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

Ivanti NAC
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (7th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (4th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Ivanti NAC is 2.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform1.4%
Ivanti NAC2.4%
Other96.2%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Le Ban - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Security Manager & Chief IT Engineer at JVPC
Affordable product with an easy initial setup process
Ivanti NAC's most valuable feature is reasonable pricing The product's performance needs improvement. We are doing the PoC of Ivanti NAC. I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten. I rate Ivanti NAC's scalability an eight out of ten. We have 150 users for it. I contacted the…
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Integration with other vendors is possible."
"The profiler option allows me to see every detail in a systematic manner from a switch. I can choose the switch and I can see the port NAC address and time."
"Ivanti NAC's most valuable feature is reasonable pricing."
"The best features ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform offers is that the entire platform is perfect, it is very user-friendly and helps us manage our endpoints easily, and the parts that stand out for my team are elevation, password rotation, and application control."
"The application control is highly valued by me."
"The solution has made knowing and managing what is running on our clients' devices much easier for us. We know they cannot run what they are not supposed to run."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped reduce the incidents of clients getting exploits or ransomware put on their devices by 110 times."
"Allowlisting, in general, is valuable because it allows us to have a lot more granular control over what is executed on a desktop. We are also able to ringfence known vectors of attack through Office applications, email, browsers, etc."
"The single pane of glass management for all this functionality is really the best feature, as it unifies many utilities that would have been separate costs before and lets us sleep at night knowing that things are being monitored 24 hours."
"The customer service is amazing."
 

Cons

"The product's performance needs improvement."
"At some point, the server got cached and we faced several issues that impacted our customers. We would like to have this resolved."
"The documentation needs to be improved. There are a lot of details that are missed which makes it confusing."
"Initially, the learning curve was slightly high for me, however, that has been resolved now."
"I'm not sure if I'm using it wrong; however, I find that I have to babysit it too much."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"The user experience could be improved. Most complaints we get are based on users wanting certain functionality."
"In my opinion, it is a love-hate relationship with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform; everybody hates it because it causes so much need for user input to request to allow applications, but it is a necessary evil because security is paramount and it is the most important feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"The Cyber Hero certification exam could use a bit of love, but overall, I have been very satisfied with the platform."
"I cannot suggest anything that they are not already doing. They should keep adding features as they have been."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is cost-effective."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
884,656 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business51
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is good because it has a nominal price.I would say ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Pr...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by providing admin rights that allow us to manage it from the server by providing some token IDs or any kind of OTP if someone h...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to secure the server.A specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to secure my s...
 

Also Known As

Pulse Policy Secure
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Entegrus
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Ivanti NAC vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,656 professionals have used our research since 2012.