No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 20, 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 Policy Secure (IPS)
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)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (6th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS) is 3.2%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.5%
Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS)3.2%
Other94.3%
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."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits my company by allowing us to be preventative instead of being retroactive or reactive."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform provides no-sweat security that we can easily deploy. We do not worry about our habitual clickers because we receive an alert if they try to do something, and we know ThreatLocker has already taken care of it."
"From 1 to 10, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as a 10; I've been super happy with it, advising other companies to just do it since it's a simple setup, easy to use, intuitive, and worth the money compared to potential losses."
"I really enjoy ringfencing and elevation features. It makes my life easier because I do not have to get on a computer to elevate a prompt to allow users to run something they run every day as an admin."
"The most valuable feature is its learning capability."
"What sets ThreatLocker apart from competitors offering similar solutions is ringfencing. The ringfencing controls, along with the application elevation features, keep it out of the user's line of sight while still protecting them."
"We have gotten a lot of use out of the feature of removing local admins from a lot of computers with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform."
"Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it."
 

Cons

"The documentation needs to be improved. There are a lot of details that are missed which makes it confusing."
"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."
"It is not easy to use. I am still learning."
"ThreatLocker's technical support process could be streamlined by reducing the number of steps required to reach a human agent."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
"I took off one point because sometimes it can be a bit complicated for new engineers, such as my teammates, especially for those who don't have hands-on experience."
"ThreatLocker Allowlisting needs to improve its user interface and overall workflow."
"There are some programs that, when they update, they hit other folders; it would be nice to be able to see where that application is pointing when it wants to update, especially if it's updating in the AppData folder or C Windows folder since it might be the same application already whitelisted, but it changes around."
"From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing."
"The allowlisting feature of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is really good. It's very, very strict, so in some ways, it can be frustrating because you have to explicitly allow each individual thing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is cost-effective."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business60
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise18
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, you have a lot of information or a lot of alerts. However, the moment you zoom i...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for identifying the most critical and sensitive information of the o...
 

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 Policy Secure (IPS) vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.