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

NordLayer 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

NordLayer
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
13th
Ranking in ZTNA
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (27th), Internet Security (14th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (21st), ZTNA as a Service (19th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (14th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (20th)
Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
6th
Ranking in ZTNA
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of NordLayer is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 4.6%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Portnox4.6%
NordLayer0.3%
Other95.1%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Christophe Derdeyn - PeerSpot reviewer
A convenient and easy tool with an incredibly high number of dialing points
The solution is convenient and easy. It has an incredibly high number of dialing points for pretty much every single country in the world. It has a few additional security features. It has a function that prevents unsecured access if my connection were to drop for any reason. It’s something I like. It has threat protection features. It can protect my web connection and files against malicious downloads and trackers.
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

"The solution is convenient and easy."
"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 most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"The solution has a valuable reporting feature."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"One of the features I enjoyed the most about Portnox was the ability to dive in with proper details on an endpoint."
"The technical support is top-notch."
 

Cons

"The tool is not perfectly stable."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"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."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"In terms of operational efficiency, things are more complicated now. It takes more time to get devices on the network, but we increased security quite a bit."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"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."
"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."
"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

Information not available
"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"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."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
"The vendor price is fair."
"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
866,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
28%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Legal Firm
8%
Healthcare Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

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

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

 

Also Known As

No data available
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hostinger, Shutterstock, USMobile, Soundcloud, Calendly, whatagraph.
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: August 2025.
866,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.