We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Using this solution gives us the ability to allow proper access to the network."
"[One of the most valuable features] is just the ease of use. It's pretty simple to set up certs that we can add to our clients to make sure that they connect properly, [as is] whitelisting Mac addresses."
"The ability to allow or deny hosts onto the network is valuable. It provides great security to the network environment."
"Cisco ISE integrates with everything else."
"The most valuable feature is AnyConnect Posture because it scans all the programs on the workstation and checks if the antivirus is up to date, as well as the cryptographic keys on our SSD."
"The user experience of the solution is great. It's a very transparent system."
"When we use ISE, one of the helpful things is that I can go through the dashboard and get every step along the way of how a device was authenticated. If it's failing, why did it fail? Why is it unauthorized? If there's an error, what is the error and how can I fix that error? If it's something that, if they should be passing, why are they failing?"
"I've had no issues with scalability. I started using it on two campuses, and now I'm using it across the country and scaling it across subsidiaries in other countries."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"F5 BIG-IP APM is relatively easy to use."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"We have seen a return on investment from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager. It provided access at a time when we didn't have it."
"Stickiness is the most valuable feature of the product."
"The portal access was very good."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"In a future release, I would like to see network access control. That is something that customers seem to be looking for."
"The user interface could be improved to make it more user-friendly."
"Sometimes some of Cisco ISE's graphical interfaces could be a little bit smoother. However, with the different versions, the product is getting better and better."
"Since we have started, we struggled a lot to implement this solution into our network, and we opened a case a couple of times. Up until this point, nothing else needs to be improved with this product."
"Sometimes, there are instances when Cisco ISE simply fails to function without any apparent reason, and regardless of the investigation we undertake, the logs indicate that everything is functioning properly, making it somewhat inexplicable."
"I would like to see them simplify the dashboard. It's very configurable, but, at the same time, it's not easy to maneuver through it. They should "Merakify" it."
"The area where things could be improved is education. It's complicated to deploy initially because you have to know what you're getting into."
"It does a good job of establishing trust for every access request. We have had a little bit of a challenge with profiling, but we are probably about 80% there."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal."
"The initial setup was complex."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
"The solution’s GUI looks very old."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"The price of this product can be improved."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 6th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 13 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) writes " Facilitates packet inspection, modification, and offloading and offers visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, allowing for pre-production server testing". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, whereas F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ivanti Connect Secure, Microsoft Entra ID and Aruba ClearPass. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.