We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiClient 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 regulation of accounts is by far the most needed and valuable part of the application."
"With CyberArk, you can be fully confident that your existing accounts are secure. You will be 100 percent"
"We are able to rotate privileged user passwords to eliminate fraudulent use."
"We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"This is a complete solution that can detect cyber attacks well."
"Technical support is very helpful whenever we have any questions."
"Within the solution, I love the fact that everything is recorded. The configuration capabilities are great, too."
"You can easily manage more than 4000 accounts with one PSM."
"I think the solution is highly scalable."
"It's easy to use, easy to deploy, and I have more visibility over my network that shows which users are connected to the firewalls, which users are connected to the network, and what they're accessing."
"It's pretty stable, and I don't have any problems with it."
"The configuration is the most valuable feature."
"The integration of the vulnerability scan, mobile detection, and VPN client."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is its performance."
"We mainly use this solution because we have many Fortinet solutions like antivirus and SSL assessment."
"This solution makes it easier to work from home."
"CyberArk has to continue to evolve with that threat landscape to make sure that they're still protecting those credentials that are owned by those that have privileged accounts in the firms."
"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."
"Initial setup is complex. Lots of architecture, lots of planning, and lots of education and training are needed."
"It's hard to find competent resellers/support."
"The current interface doesn't scale that well, and has some screens still in the old layout."
"More additional features as far as the REST is concerned, because we have something which was the predecessor to REST. A lot of the features which were in the predecessor have not necessarily been ported over to REST yet."
"There is a learning curve when it comes to planning out the deployment strategy, but once it is defined, it runs itself."
"If there is an area that has room for improvement, it's probably working with their support and getting people on the phone. That is hard to do with most products in general, but that seems to be the difficult area. The product is fantastic, but sometimes we want somebody on the phone."
"FortiClient is not great in Linux."
"Sometimes there are issues when we are trying to connect."
"The pricing could use improvement."
"Fortinet FortiClient should improve its visibility of the consumption of traffic and end-user action, which is very low."
"The solution could add data to the endpoint."
"Fortinet needs to cover more areas where threats can come from."
"Its stability can be improved. It is not as reliable as I would like it to be. There are times when things don't work quite right. Our biggest pain point is not related to Fortinet FortiClient and the whole scheme of things. It is related to one of the additional services called FortiGuard. They are the arm that does all of the updates to definitions, keeps all the signatures updated, and responds to new threats and whatnot. What we have found is that they react quickly, but sometimes their solutions aren't compatible with all of the components of the Fortinet security suite, specifically around FortiSandbox."
"Initially, the support was very poor. It is getting better, but they should continue to improve this."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. 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 Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
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.