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

Menlo Secure vs Portnox comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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

Menlo Secure
Ranking in ZTNA
24th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (26th), Firewalls (52nd), Cloud Security Remediation (9th)
Portnox
Ranking in ZTNA
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (6th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 2.3%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Portnox2.3%
Menlo Secure1.8%
Other95.9%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701794 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Bluechip Enterprise at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees
Provides strong protection and multiple use cases but struggles with market recognition
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco. What can be improved is market awareness and adoption of the technology. When selling it in the channel, regardless of how good the technology might be, success depends more on market adoption and awareness.
Reviewer921606 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Cloud Security Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Centralized access control has simplified operations but still needs more flexible on‑prem options
Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability. If you are in a highly regulated industry with mandates requiring the solution to be completely on-premises, Portnox does not work at all. I do not think they position their products for those industries. Even for non-heavily regulated industries, if you want a self-sufficient system within your own premises, there are design constraints because at some point you must reach out to Portnox infrastructure in the cloud, and if that is unavailable, it suffers. For example, on deep-sea oil rigs without proper connectivity, it struggles. I am not sure they want to enter that particular business segment, as it may not align with their value proposition. I cannot blindly select this product and deploy it everywhere; I must make deliberate decisions first. Portnox could improve by reducing its heavy reliance on the cloud. While I do not think they want to eliminate this aspect, a complete solution for regulated entities would include some on-premises setup that is self-sufficient and does not depend on the cloud. This is the most important improvement. Second, Portnox already has a robust integration ecosystem with many vendors, but not all. Even when integration exists, the extent varies, particularly regarding vendor-specific attributes. I have never faced challenges because my security tools and stack have been standard: Cisco, Aruba access points, Cisco switches, and UniFi, all of which work well with them. However, there is room for deeper integration when compared to tools like Cisco ISE and Aruba ClearPass. Their offerings are clear, easy to onboard, and their day zero and day one onboarding activities are streamlined and straightforward. They share best practice checklists that make configuration simple.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"The cloud-based feature of Portnox is excellent."
"The Portnox dashboard is very easy to use, and the UI is simple."
"Portnox ensures system compliance through policy enforcement, including antivirus updates, Windows operating system updates, and system patches, helping network administrators maintain system health and security across the network."
"The technical support is top-notch."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"The solution has a valuable reporting feature."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"Portnox's pricing is very conservative and offers great value for money."
 

Cons

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"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."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"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 has design considerations that limit its applicability."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."
"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"The vendor price is fair."
"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."
"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 licensing module should be reviewed to count the number of devices instead of port numbers of total switches. There is a case for this where not all ports for a switch are used by devices. Unused ports are calculated in the license, then the customer pays for license for those unused ports."
"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which mak...
What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic access, and by doing it that way, it has multiple use cases. For example, it man...
What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some of these functions, people typically choose another technology for those specifi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox Clear?
I know that IT solutions are expensive. You are charged according to the number of users. For now, the organisation can afford it, but smaller organisations may not be, so Portnox can also consider...
What needs improvement with Portnox Clear?
The area Portnox needs to organise more training for its partners. They are doing well, but areas of knowledge gaps are still visible. There are times unexpected things happen with Portnox, like Po...
What is your primary use case for Portnox Clear?
My use case for Portnox is access control, specifically focused on access control.
 

Also Known As

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
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 Menlo Secure vs. Portnox and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.