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

Armis vs Palo Alto Networks IoT Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 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

Armis
Ranking in IoT Security
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM) (1st), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th), Cyber-Physical Systems Protection (1st)
Palo Alto Networks IoT Secu...
Ranking in IoT Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the IoT Security category, the mindshare of Armis is 13.7%, down from 18.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is 6.9%, up from 6.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IoT Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Armis13.7%
Palo Alto Networks IoT Security6.9%
Other79.4%
IoT Security
 

Featured Reviews

SaketShrivastava - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology And Digitization Lead at JLL
Comprehensive asset visibility and OT operations support enhance risk mitigation
I use Armis for asset discovery and vulnerability assessments of the OT network Armis is easy to use. Very few software solutions have OT capabilities that do not impact OT operations. Its asset visibility is good as well. This comprehensive feature set is crucial for our operations.…
reviewer2774463 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager ERP (Insurance) at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Have used it to manage device updates remotely and now see potential for improved centralized control
One of the favorite features is that they can plug in a device and update it without being on the network, so you can perform an offline update. If all the IoT devices in the field can provide a single pane of glass and management through that platform in a controlled fashion, that would be really beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It determines which assets and devices are at risk, alerts you if there's a risk, and categorizes all assets, including personal computers, mobile phones, servers, televisions, cars, and video game consoles."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is asset tracking."
"The initial setup and deployment were simple."
"The technology is good."
"Armis has positively impacted my organization by helping me identify vulnerabilities more effectively, especially on assets that I did not know existed on the network."
"Armis is very easy to implement due to its agentless design and offers a granular level of visibility for all assets in the network."
"Armis is a straightforward and user-friendly solution."
"Armis is very easy to implement due to its agentless design and offers a granular level of visibility for all assets in the network."
"It is simple to use. We just need to enable features and then configure IoT policies."
"Single-pass traffic processing enables very high throughput and low latency."
"This solution has been most valuable for establishing a VPN and implementing allow/deny rules. It has also enabled us to create security policies. It is an easy solution to customise when it comes to creating templates and pulling reports."
"I like the threat information, and we can share the logging data with Cortex Data Lake."
"I like the Cortex Data Lake integration with security automation."
"From a security standpoint, it provides a comprehensive range of standard security features that align with our requirements."
"I would recommend Palo Alto Networks IoT Security to any organization with automation plants or standard enterprise IT environments."
"Palo Alto is valued for its GlobalProtect feature, which offers a range of security options, including user ID mapping and VPNs."
 

Cons

"We face difficulties in integrating the product with ticketing tools like ServiceNow."
"The vulnerability assessment for Windows is not that great. It misses out on a lot of vulnerabilities."
"The solution's vulnerability testing could be improved."
"We have faced issues with the tool's stability."
"We face issues during implementation."
"Armis could improve its geographic spread and marketing campaigns across regions."
"Armis doesn't have a back intel feature."
"After implementing Armis, an organization experiences it as an add-on. Without asset visibility or vulnerability prioritization, it becomes a useless product."
"I had to call the support because there were some devices that were not showing up."
"The support is in line with Palo Alto Networks services for other products but needs improvement."
"The reporting for this solution could be improved. The logs we receive are only saved for one week. We would like to have the database timeframe increased to a month or two for historical reporting as well as increased storage capabilities to support this data and reporting."
"There can be more automation in terms of security and detection. It is already good."
"More application signatures are required."
"The cost is still high and licensing is still complex."
"Palo Alto Networks IoT Security's reporting capabilities are less comprehensive and robust than those provided by Cisco."
"It would be beneficial to have a more centralized and user-friendly platform that could consolidate all the necessary information, which proved challenging during the initial POC phase."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheap."
"The initial investment is substantial, but the renewal costs make it financially unsustainable."
"The successful migration trend suggests that Palo Alto provides a superior cost-benefit ratio for firewall solutions."
"While Palo Alto Networks IoT Security might cost more than some competitors, its features and effectiveness justify the price tag."
"The pricing for Palo Alto Networks IoT Security is a bit high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IoT Security solutions are best for your needs.
884,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Performing Arts
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Armis?
Armis can be somewhat expensive and there is not much sales presence for Armis. Without any existing security solution on the customer's end, Armis will only collect telemetry data, which is the de...
What is your primary use case for Armis?
I am a distributor for Armis and have been working with them for about two to three years now. I am familiar with Armis Centrix for asset management and security. Armis is typically used for correl...
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
One thing I communicated to them is that they need to provide a managed update for their IoT devices.
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
I use it for one of my customers, and my role is to help my customer with the solution. They use it for their IoT devices in the field, and they have a lot of sensors out there for their heating eq...
What advice do you have for others considering Palo Alto Networks IoT Security?
The pricing is not that bad. I would rate this solution an 8 out of 10.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung Research America, IDT Corporation, Gett
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Armis vs. Palo Alto Networks IoT Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.