We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's least privilege enforcement has helped us ensure access is given to only the required people."
"The privileged access and the application control are helpful in making sure we have good, robust challenge responses. Blacklisting with trusted application protection is also beneficial for us."
"What I liked about this solution is that it can also integrate for tracking malicious use or sending analytics to a host that can process them. I don't know if CyberArk, Centrify, or Thycotic can do that. The analytics was something the client really wanted, and they already had BeyondTrust. It is very scalable. The agent on the workstation is very thin, and the processing power required on a server is nothing out of the ordinary. It is also very stable and easy to deploy."
"Technical support is good."
"Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"It scales easily and the product is stable."
"I find the solution’s features like section management, password management, and analytics valuable."
"I'm a BeyondTrust partner and I have multiple deployments, four or five banks right now. The features that give us quite an edge compared to what our competitors are offering - like IBM or Thycotic - are the Session Management, that is quite a big one; also the recording of keystrokes. In addition, there is the password vaulting and state-of-the-art Password Management, which I haven't seen in other products."
"The most valuable feature is that their database is completely encrypted and protected with multiple layers."
"We can do both server and endpoint protection."
"What sets CyberArk apart is its continuous innovation, staying ahead of the competition."
"Users can scale the solution."
"The solution allows me to give access and privileges to each user individually"
"I like that you can remove the admin rights from the user's computer and have control over the environment. That means you can delete the local admins and grant them proper privileges with the console. So, they will get proper permissions for applications they need, but we don't have to do it. In the domain where we don't have control, the user can only do specified actions, but not all of them."
"The product is stable."
"It offers great performance."
"We faced some challenges with remote desktop sessions."
"It keeps on breaking every now and then. It is not yet mature. Every time something new comes up or we run into some new issues, the culprit is BeyondTrust because the agents and the adapter are not mature. The new development process goes on, and they're not able to handle things. It should be mature. It shouldn't break every now and then."
"They are doing good for now, but they should start to consider tight integration with Mac solutions. There should be more integration with Mac. There should be Active Directory (AD) Bridging. Thycotic and Centrify have it currently because they merged and joined forces, and it was a feature available in Centrify. So, basically, they joined forces to create a kind of perfect product. If you have a hybrid or mixed environment with Windows and Mac, your Active Directory can only manage or enforce policies on Windows, but what about your Mac devices? How do you control them? So, AD Bridging will act as a bridge to bring all your Mac devices into your Active Directory. This way you have full control over your entire environment."
"The other area to improve is that they rely on MS SQL servers only. You cannot have any other database behind them. They have to be on MS SQL. If they can do something about these issues, this would be a better alternative for some customers."
"How the accounts are presented in the solution's UI can be improved."
"Its feature for establishing workflows needs improvement."
"The product should improve its price."
"The weaknesses are related to the effort required to migrate from existing technologies or having no Privilege Access Management (PAM) at all to adopting technologies like BeyondTrust. It involves changes in processes and can take a significant amount of time, typically six to twelve months."
"The product needs a streamlined user interface; improvements to the user interface can enhance user experience and make the solution more intuitive to navigate."
"For an experienced system implementer it will take approximately one day. However, for somebody who is inexperienced it may take up to five days."
"The solution can be complex to use at times."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Technical support is slow to respond when we run into issues."
"The price of the solution should improve."
"We have had some major issues with the tool, but we have worked with the R&D teams and we have worked with support. There is room for improvement, especially on response times. But they're working on it and they're doing the best they can."
"The installation process is pretty difficult."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 28 reviews while CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is ranked 6th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 28 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager writes "Offers integrated solutions and expands its capabilities through strategic acquisitions". BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server, ARCON Privileged Access Management and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Tanium and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management vs. CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) 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.