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

Portnox vs Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) 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

Portnox
Ranking in ZTNA
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (6th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
Symantec Zero Trust Network...
Ranking in ZTNA
25th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (23rd), ZTNA as a Service (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Portnox is 0.9%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

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.
cto543714 - PeerSpot reviewer
Restricts access to applications but improvement is needed in integrations
Over the last year, I have been working with customers because it's changing and maturing. These things are rolled out in segments and chunks, not all at once. Additional internal work is often required to make it functional, such as properly configuring the active directory. This internal work can take up to three months. The process varies, and implementing Symantec ZTNA quickly is not realistic. I wouldn't recommend the tool to non-core customers because you won't get the support you need. I'd rate Symantec ZTNA a seven on a scale of one to ten. They're still integrating different pieces into their solution. The challenge with ZTNA is that different companies implement it slightly differently, with some features present in one product but missing in another. ZTNA is a tricky acronym that companies use, but when you look closely, you find that each vendor might only have some of the expected features.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For the information security team, the security level was improved because it helped to manage and prevent rogue devices from connecting to the corporate network. The reporting was granular, and reports we scheduled for delivery on Portnox were useful during investigations and audits, especially in cases where the IP address changed."
"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."
"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."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"The product is a valuable solution within zero-trust architecture, enhancing network security and visibility."
"One of the features I enjoyed the most about Portnox was the ability to dive in with proper details on an endpoint."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"The most valuable feature of this product is restricting and controlling what people have access to. If I want a contractor to connect to my network, I can give them access to only the specific things they need without giving them full VPN access to my entire network. That's the main benefit everyone gets from it. The value depends on how many users and applications you have and what you want to share."
 

Cons

"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"As there are no agents in Portnox Clear, the customers of the product cannot download any agents on their devices, making them unsure if the product offers proper security."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"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."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"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."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled together on the back end. Sometimes, the integrations work well; sometimes, they don't. For example, if you want to use two-factor authentication, you need to integrate that into the solution. Or if you want to accept protocols other than web coming to your secure gateway, that's another integration. Supporting different devices like Macs, Samsung phones, or iPhones also requires more integrations. Ensuring all these integrations work properly is an ongoing process and a moving target."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"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 tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
"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."
"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."
"Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays the full MSRP. Typically, you negotiate and work with them on the pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
Pricing varies depending on the situation. In competitive situations, it's usually priced competitively. Nobody pays the full MSRP. Typically, you negotiate and work with them on the pricing.
What needs improvement with Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
For areas of improvement, the main issue is with integrations. The Symantec ZTNA comprises many products cobbled together on the back end. Sometimes, the integrations work well; sometimes, they don...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)?
The solution helps to allow access only to what is explicitly needed. This means restricting access to specific applications rather than providing broad access to multiple resources, some of which ...
 

Also Known As

Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
Symantec Secure Access Cloud, Luminate.io, Luminate
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
NEX, AIG, Fiverr, Upwork
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, Check Point Software Technologies, ThreatLocker and others in ZTNA. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.