We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is Special Monitoring."
"The technical support for this solution is very good. If I was to rate it on a scale of one to five, I would give it a five."
"Because we now have the ability to grant access to management utilities like DNS Manager, Sequel Studio, and MMC, in a secure fashion, without system admins being required to continually reenter various passwords that are stored who knows where, it has really made the system admin's job much easier. It has made the PSM's job much easier. It has made the auditor's job and the security team's job and the access manager's job significantly easier, because we're able to move much more quickly toward a role-based access management system, and that is really streamlining the whole onboarding/offboarding management process."
"What I found most valuable in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the Session Manager as it allows you to split the connection between the administrator site and the target site. I also found the Password Manager valuable as it lets you rotate the passwords of privileged users."
"You can write different types of policies for custom business needs or any developer needs. If they need certain functions allocated, they can be customized easily."
"Our go-to solution for securing against the pass the hash attack vector and auditing privileged account usage."
"Their legacy of more than 20 years is very valuable. It brings a lot of stability to the product and a wide variety of integration with the ecosystem. Because of these factors, it has also been very successful in deployment. So, the legacy and integration with other technologies make the PAM platform very stable and strong. In terms of features, most of the other vendors are still focusing just on the privileged access management or session recording, but CyberArk has incorporated artificial intelligence to make PAM a more proactive system. They have implemented threat analytics into this, and there is also a lot of focus on domain controller production, Windows Server protection, and stuff like that. They have also further advanced it with the security on the cloud and DevOps systems. They have a bundle licensing model, which really helps. They don't have a complex licensing model. Even though in our market, people say CyberArk is expensive as compared to some of the other products, but in terms of overall value and as a bundling solution, it is an affordable and highly scalable product."
"All the features of CyberArk are useful for me, but the biggest one is that CyberArk has logs for all the features. That is important when there is a problem. You know where to look and you have the information. In cyber security, the most important aspect is information."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"F5 BIG-IP APM is relatively easy to use."
"The portal access was very good."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"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."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"We would, of course, always prefer it if the pricing was cheaper."
"One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible."
"Having a centralized place to manage the solution has been something that I have always wanted, and they are starting to understand that and bring things back together."
"it manages creds based on Organizational Units. That is, a "safe" is limited to specific OUs. That makes for very elaborate OU structure, or you risk exposing too many devices by putting most of them in fewer OUs."
"Our DevOps team is looking in the direction of cloud, because we are not in it today. We are hoping to build it with Conjur from the ground up."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"We found a lot of errors during the initial setup. They should work to improve the implementation experience and to remove errors from the process."
"In the beginning, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager didn't have a multifactor authentication feature, so that was an area for improvement, but now it's part of the solution. Having just one console for two CyberArk products would be good, particularly for the CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and the CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, with the latter being a product for endpoint management that supports the workstations and allows you to manage workstations. In the next update of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, it would be good to have a local agent where you can manage all users and processes, and have an agent on the servers such as Linux and Windows."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
"We do not have knowledgeable support teams locally."
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"The initial setup was complex."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"F5 BIG-IP APM disconnects when you leave it for long enough, but that is natural for IT solutions to do. That's a little bit frustrating."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 5th in Access Management with 13 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". 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". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, whereas F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Ivanti Connect Secure, Microsoft Remote Desktop Services and Microsoft Entra ID. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.
