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

StrongDM vs Symantec Privileged Access Manager 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

StrongDM
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Access Management (15th)
Symantec Privileged Access ...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
18th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of StrongDM is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Privileged Access Manager is 1.6%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2589615 - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamlessly manage cloud access with enhanced security features
I was part of the team managing the infrastructure for a small startup company. We used StrongDM to provide access to cloud private networks, control user access to databases, hosts through SSH, and Kubernetes resources StrongDM was able to replace the combination of different products we…
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure management of sensitive servers and seamless applications with direct linking
The credential injection feature is highly valued, particularly for RDP sessions. A majority of customers use it for RDP, and a couple for Linux servers. The broader capabilities, including access to multiple systems, web-based applications, and clustering, have never posed an issue. The threat analytics aspect is also a robust feature that analyzes all pertinent information.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"All of the logging is handled for us, including for auditing purposes. Looking through the audit logs is not a painful experience."
"We primarily used StrongDM for access to resources on private networks like EC2 machines, Kubernetes clusters, and various databases."
"StrongDM replaced the puzzle of different solutions with one single product, which made managing resources more efficient."
"The DB clustering is a really good benefit of using CA PAM."
"The two factor authentication, and the single most important capability was it supported PIV and CAC as one of the two factors. That was pretty huge for us."
"Comprehensive coverage of the required features for the PAM solution."
"You can do A2A integration. You can have your own script, which can then run outside of PA to retrieve the password and perform other tasks."
"Whoever built it from the ground up, they understand how an organization is laid out."
"It is great for identity governance."
"One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements."
"It gives you list of servers, so you can see which users have access to which servers. This is really useful, so we can make sure nobody is getting extra access than what is needed."
 

Cons

"It would be beneficial to have better control and alignment between frequent updates and improved communication regarding possible negative effects on existing customer bases."
"It would be beneficial to have better control and alignment between frequent updates and improved communication regarding possible negative effects on existing customer bases."
"We've had a few issues with the stability of this product in the past."
"It's difficult to locate the reports, there are limits on what reports can be run from the GUI, and the report formats are lacking."
"An improvement for this solution is that it should not be constantly based on user name and password. There should be a condition to edit and update your username."
"We have to do a lot of manual work to automate features."
"They need to do a little bit more on the mainframe side.​"
"They need to have zero tier and active-active setup ​with zero minimum downtime, which they are working on it. ​"
"What I hope happens with the new product CA PAM is to keep all the useful features that exist in PA, but what I’ve noticed with many new products is the UI gets polished but systems lags stability and performance or it adds additional complexity instead of simplifying the user experience."
"The response time for support could be faster. Some features should be added: cloud-based, VPN-less, more secure, and it should be adjusted in a hybrid environment."
"The management console could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is per user per month."
"They offer per-device, per-user, or monthly and yearly licensing models."
"It is reasonably priced."
"The prices are not low, but one can ask for a discount. It’s not the cheapest PAM solution."
"Appliances are relatively cheap, don’t skimp. Make sure you have redundancy, high availability, and enough appliances to manage the concurrent workload."
"I would prefer better licensing options for the 20-100 users we have at a given time."
"Pricing is fair compared to other top vendors."
"It is more expensive than other solutions on the market."
"Don’t go with an agent model. Don’t go with a model that has you buying a thousand different parts. Go with PAM that gives you everything, or you’ll just be paying costs of implementing another tool that PAM would have just given you up front."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
38%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
12%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for StrongDM?
The leadership chose StrongDM after comparative research, which suggests economic benefits. It was mentioned that while the product is rapidly gaining features, it might become cost-prohibitive for...
What needs improvement with StrongDM?
It would be beneficial to have better control and alignment between frequent updates and improved communication regarding possible negative effects on existing customer bases. Also, documentation s...
What is your primary use case for StrongDM?
I was part of the team managing the infrastructure for a small startup company. We used StrongDM to provide access to cloud private networks, control user access to databases, hosts through SSH, an...
What do you like most about Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
We can check the activities in the server for fragile files and documents in case of any issues.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Due to the nature of the solution, it is hard to gauge, but compared to competitors, the pricing is very good. I would rate it as an eight and a half out of ten.
What needs improvement with Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Recent releases need improvement in webpage management. For instance, navigating through a webpage that acts like a wizard, where I proceed to the next page and enter more information, is not handl...
 

Also Known As

No data available
CA PAM, Xceedium Xsuite, CA Privileged Access Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
NEOVERA, Telesis, eSoft
Find out what your peers are saying about StrongDM vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.