No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Aruba Instant vs Omada Access Points comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 31, 2024

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

Aruba Instant
Ranking in Wireless LAN
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Omada Access Points
Ranking in Wireless LAN
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Wireless LAN category, the mindshare of Aruba Instant is 2.4%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Omada Access Points is 3.1%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless LAN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Omada Access Points3.1%
Aruba Instant2.4%
Other94.5%
Wireless LAN
 

Featured Reviews

SreejeshSoman - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Consultant at Vertex Techno Solutions (B) Pvt Ltd
Has supported mid-market deployments with cloud-based centralized management and reliable wireless performance
I faced challenges earlier with a limitation of 50 APs in single sites, but that has enhanced to 100 numbers, eliminating that challenge for Aruba Instant On team. Additionally, some features are not listed in the cloud management platform and still require offline access, so enhancing the cloud management features would be better for us.
reviewer1253430 - PeerSpot reviewer
Development & Innovation Expert at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
They have good specs, and the price is lower than competing solutions
Omada could add some API integrations that would help with our automated solution. We're trying to integrate, and we're having some issues because some of the calls are not there. The API still needs some development. They could also enhance the reporting capabilities. At the same time, Omada's reporting has improved considerably in the latest version. That was an issue for us, but now it seems okay. More carrier-grade integrations should be available on Omada access points in the future. They could also add a hot spot and maybe a mobile upload solution. I still have issues from time to time when switching access points. I'm still connected to the SSID, but my signal drops when I switch from 5 Ghz to 2.4 Ghz. I'm not switched to the other access point that is closer to me. I should have been switched automatically to the other access point. Occasionally, the handoff doesn't work. I have tried this with WiFi 6, and it worked fine, so I think they may have resolved this issue in the latest versions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of the solution are in the areas like routing and VLAN."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Captive Portal, which we employ for our guest network. It enables us to create a separate virtual subnet for guests, ensuring their network traffic remains isolated from our office network. Another valuable feature is its role-based access control. This functionality allows us to assign different access privileges to users based on their roles within the organization."
"The stability is very good; I'm very impressed with it, and I've been working with it for years."
"The most beneficial features for network management are the price and the cloud console."
"Aruba Instant is easy to manage."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba Instant is its cloud capability, which allows us to manage it through the cloud."
"Aruba Instant is a cloud-managed solution that can be managed from the cloud."
"Aruba Instant is cloud-based, and thus, it improves wireless network performance on cloud platforms. The solution allows network monitoring through devices like mobiles and desktops, which is a feasible option. The tool also has Bluetooth settings so a user can deploy Aruba Instant through a serial number or the Bluetooth option."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its price."
"The most valuable feature of TP-Link Auranet EAP is its high performance."
"We use Omada Access Points for the network and Wi-Fi."
"When this solution is set up, it is solid. It offers fast deployment."
"Its sturdiness and cost-effectiveness are the most valuable features."
"Omada Access Points are very good in terms of wired technologies and wired connectivity."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"Omada is easy to manage, has cloud management features, and is easy to set up."
 

Cons

"The reach of the solution could be improved. It could be a bit stronger."
"The product's high cost is an area where improvements are required."
"They should enhance reporting and add more features."
"Doesn't support enough access points in one cluster."
"The meshing could use improvement but aside from that nothing else really needs improvement."
"Although built-in troubleshooting tools are available, they are not at all intuitive to use. Aruba Instant lacks decent documentation to use for troubleshooting wireless issues (fortunately there aren’t many)."
"It is good as it is. If anything, its reporting could be improved."
"There is an issue with flooding to the Aruba access point on the ports."
"It's better for smaller organizations. This would not work for enterprises. It is not very scalable."
"We have not been satisfied with the performance of TP-Link Auranet EAP."
"It is quite difficult to get support from TP-Link. They should provide more support to their clients."
"The price of the solution is an area requiring improvement since I want the solution to be made available at a cheaper price than its current market price."
"The solution takes a long time to switch to another connection, which should be improved."
"The technical support could be improved."
"The quality of the hardware needs to be improved."
"There should be more remote support for the mobile application."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is reasonably priced."
"I rate the product's price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The licensing cost is somewhere around $20,000."
"I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"In terms of costs, Aruba Instant is cheap because it doesn't require a license, but you'll incur charges for the access points. Access point charges could be more affordable."
"Aruba Instant is a free subscription with a limited lifetime warranty."
"We pay about $300 per access point."
"The product has increased its pricing by at least 30 percent."
"TP-Link provides solutions that are more cost-effective than other well-known brands."
"On a scale of one to ten for pricing, with one being cheap and ten being expensive, I would rate Omada Access Points at a one for its cost-effectiveness."
"The cost of Omada is much better than Aruba and Cisco, and it does what we need it to do in most cases. Around 10 percent of our clients need a more carrier-grade solution for mobile platforms."
"We don't have to pay for the license because the solution has no subscription cost."
"TP-Link is a good price. They have a good price. But technology-wise, it has to be better."
"Its benefit is that it is cost effective."
"The price of the solution is not a lot for five people to use it."
"The price is affordable, and we haven't had any additional costs due to having a limited number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Ubiquiti WLAN or Aruba Instant?
We researched Ubiquiti and Aruba when looking for a WLAN solution. Ubiquiti offers good WLAN access both indoors and outdoors. It provides an enterprise-level WIFI while remaining cost-effective. U...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aruba Instant?
In my experience, Aruba Instant's price is reasonable compared to premium products like Ruckus, Cisco, or Juniper. However, when compared to entry-level market segments, the price is higher. Overal...
What needs improvement with Aruba Instant?
I faced challenges earlier with a limitation of 50 APs in single sites, but that has enhanced to 100 numbers, eliminating that challenge for Aruba Instant On team. Additionally, some features are n...
What needs improvement with Omada Access Points?
Omada needs improvement in the distance it can cover. I am looking for an access point that can cover long distances.
What is your primary use case for Omada Access Points?
I am trying to design a wireless network with Omada equipment. I have deployed Omada in office areas, and now I want to deploy it in a hotel. The company size where I usually deploy is medium-sized...
What advice do you have for others considering TP-Link Auranet EAP?
Omada is a good solution that I would recommend, and it is less expensive while providing good results. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.
 

Also Known As

No data available
TP-Link Auranet EAP, TP-Link EAP, Auranet EAP, Auranet
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Purdue University, Orlando Magic, Brussels Airport Company, Molecaten Holiday Parks
Reflections Resort,Sim Lim Square, Hotel Mary Colombia, Peru WISP, Chase Grammer School
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Instant vs. Omada Access Points and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.