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

Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager vs KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 23, 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

Ivanti Patch for Endpoint M...
Ranking in Patch Management
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
KACE Systems Management App...
Ranking in Patch Management
9th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Client Desktop Management (3rd), Endpoint Compliance (7th), Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (12th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Patch Management category, the mindshare of Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager is 2.3%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) is 3.9%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Patch Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA)3.9%
Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager2.3%
Other93.8%
Patch Management
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Baber - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at Alghanim Industries
Enables organizations to install patches easily, but the UI must be more user-friendly
We can push many things from a centralized endpoint system. If we want to install software on multiple servers, we can do it from the centralized system. We can also run commands and push packages from a centralized location. We can automate things. Images are deployed on our laptops through Ivanti. Whenever a new laptop comes, we connect to the network, and the system gets installed with predefined applications. It happens automatically.
MH
Server Administrator III at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
Reliability and adaptability enable efficient application deployment and security management
The best features Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) offers include the scripting function, which stands out to me because I can find specific needs and deploy the applications based on those needs. There was a time when scripting really saved me time by allowing me to find specific registry entries and modify them to patch security vulnerabilities. Scripting has saved us hundreds of hours over the years when patching these vulnerabilities compared to how we did it before. I really enjoy the security features that are enabled to deploy Microsoft and other vendor patches, which stand out to me as key functionalities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's been doing a lot for us, especially with third-party software patching and scheduling. We create multiple projects for monthly patch distribution and manage it all well."
"Clear visibility regarding the status of the endpoint."
"When it comes to Ivanti Patch for endpoints, I find peer-to-peer patching valuable. Having a peer-to-peer patching capability is highly beneficial for us."
"The product is easy to use, easy to implement, and easy to manage."
"It is excellent in terms of updating and configuring everything the way we need. For anything more complex, we do professional service engagements, and they're exceptional. For anything less complex, we just need to ask questions. Their support division is extremely good too."
"KACE’s knowledge-based articles are very good."
"The most valuable feature is the imaging of computers through the SDA... Being able to do that so quickly with the SDA, and to then use the SMA for reinstalling software, has been huge for our productivity."
"Asset management is most valuable. It is essential for all customers. The other features are also useful, but asset management is most important."
"The service desk can be configured and customized to better serve our environment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to have an overview of all devices that are accessing our environment."
"Patching is definitely the most valuable feature. It gives us good, centralized software, which comes in very handy since we are doing 400 servers at a time. It enables us to manage all the servers, and to deal with the application team regarding reboots and scheduling."
"The single pane of glass for managing devices is helpful because it allows me to perform updates and control things without having to disturb the doctors or nurses."
 

Cons

"The UI must be more user-friendly."
"The major challenges are macOS updates, patching, and backups. And for drawbacks, I wish Patch management was cloud-based instead of hosted on our own server."
"Inability to configure a rule-based management."
"It would be great to have an easier way to patch Linux machines within the product."
"The only hiccups we had were some power issues, where the box was a little under-powered early on."
"One of the complications is that they don't have 24/7 support, and they're also not in our time zone... Sometimes, no matter how critical my application is, if my production server is down I won't be able to connect with anybody till 11:00 AM Eastern Standard Time."
"I think it should have the ability to have the applications automatically update. It would be really helpful if this would override what the user might choose to do."
"It is a little bit difficult to use the license compliances because you need to decide when you are using the software catalog if you are using it with their license compliance or the normal software part. Under the inventory, you can use software as a menu link or software catalog. Most of my specialist software is not in the software catalog. When I try to import them, in my license compliances overview, there are cryptic names for this software that I have to import. That is not very good for the reports that I use. When I take them to my bosses, they see cryptic names of software that they don't understand. It would be much better for me if I could use software and the software catalog as well for the license compliances."
"I've had some issues with patch catalogue."
"I would like for there to be improvement when it comes to Microsoft and Windows updates. It has the ability to do it but the control of it is not there like I have in the Windows Server Update Services. The way KACE does it is still very granular. You don't really see the process like it is in the Windows Server Update Services. I think that would be one of the biggest things that I would like to see KACE really put some work into and really make that a big enhancement."
"The problem is that it's harder to directly emulate a lot of the stuff that the group policies do, using the KACE solution. With regular group policies, you just specify the various settings you want to change on the workstations, and then you specify the workstations and—while it's kind of an ugly mess—it does it. Whereas on KACE, you really have to know what you're doing with scripting to effectively script those exact same changes."
"When we have to do a rebuild on these machines, although it is rare, I would like to be able to do more than 10 at a time. With the current limit, it slows me down because I have to set up 10, then the next 10, and so forth."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, it is on the expensive side."
"It may be more expensive, but you get what you pay for."
"The cost of KACE has been relatively low compared to other systems. Even if those systems have the same cost, they do not do as much of the third-party patching that KACE natively does."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Licensing is very straightforward. They don't overcomplicate it. This is not a Cisco product where you have to have 30 different licenses just to open the box. It's pretty much set-and-forget. You pay an annual license... The cost is in the mid to upper range, but the ROI exceeds the outside cost, especially once you've had the system for a while."
"Their pricing is per end-point device. There is an initial cost for the license for the server, which is pretty low, and then there is a per end-point device license, which is also fairly low. So, the pricing is still reasonable."
"The pricing is great. It's billed annually and it's very reasonable."
"The pricing and licensing are good. It's worth it."
"We are also saving on the licensing fee, compared to other endpoint management solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Patch Management solutions are best for your needs.
879,927 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
7%
University
12%
Government
9%
Non Profit
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Ivanti Patch for Endpoints?
It's been doing a lot for us, especially with third-party software patching and scheduling. We create multiple projects for monthly patch distribution and manage it all well.
What is your primary use case for Ivanti Patch for Endpoints?
We use the solution to patch Windows and Linux machines. We download the patches and implement them. We get vulnerability reports after patching.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest KACE Systems Management?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) is that, hands down, it beat all of the others in simplicity and pricing.
What needs improvement with Quest KACE Systems Management?
I wish Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) would have a top-down approach since we use orgs; currently, we have to go into each org to deploy applications when we need them all across the...
What is your primary use case for Quest KACE Systems Management?
My main use case for Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) is to deploy applications and maintain security, and we use it day-to-day to handle those tasks. With Quest KACE Systems Managemen...
 

Also Known As

Ivanti Patch for Endpoints, Patch for Endpoints, Shavlik Patch for Endpoints
Dell KACE Systems Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

InfoPro Digital, Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District
Waypoint, Mattos Filho, Meetic, Gems Education, Green Clinic HealthSystem, Service King
Find out what your peers are saying about Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager vs. KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,927 professionals have used our research since 2012.