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

BigFix vs Heimdal Patch and Asset Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

BigFix
Ranking in Patch Management
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
100
Ranking in other categories
Configuration Management (10th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (24th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (11th)
Heimdal Patch and Asset Man...
Ranking in Patch Management
43rd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Patch Management category, the mindshare of BigFix is 4.7%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Heimdal Patch and Asset Management is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Patch Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
BigFix4.7%
Heimdal Patch and Asset Management0.8%
Other94.5%
Patch Management
 

Featured Reviews

InderjeetSingh4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Administrator at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
End-to-end automation has simplified patching and software deployment across thousands of servers
There is one feature in BigFix called the automation patch policy that requires enhancement. When an action is initiated through the patch policy, it appears on the console but arrives in chunks. When targeting hundreds of servers from the patch policy, the actions come in chunks such as ten out of six, ten out of nine, or ten out of fifteen. This fragmented approach creates a significant challenge for the patching team to monitor the action status. I would recommend that the development team provide a single action or one to two actions instead of multiple actions requiring individual monitoring. A broad status update could be provided to the client indicating the overall progress of the patch policy implementation rather than requiring monitoring of every individual action. This would reduce the bandwidth required by the team to track multiple actions on the console.
Melvin Ong - PeerSpot reviewer
Country Manager at PT Symcaw Solutions Indonesia
Has plug-and-play capability once configured and good reporting system
The tool's most valuable features have been its plug-and-play capability once configured and its reporting system is good. The most improved feature of asset auditing is its physical logging of all software. This allows us to understand what software and applications are installed on endpoints. We can easily check which software applications are installed in the network infrastructure during client processing or audits.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's easy to use, not complicated."
"Patch management: We've gone from hideous to amazing."
"The most valuable feature is the patching, as it's much more flexible than SCCM with better cross-platform support and more options for what we can do."
"Servers are patched more consistently than they have been previously."
"Before we had BigFix, we had problems with some malware. BigFix allows us to immediately patch all instances of endpoints that were vulnerable to antivirus and initiate scans. That's key."
"It has plugins development options, which are great."
"It is for multiple use cases. A lot of people are looking at it just for security, and that's really endpoint security. The endpoint management part of it in terms of being able to constantly do patching for Windows, Unix, macOS, Cloud, Raspberry, VMware, and all Linux flavors is important, and they are very good at that. They have support for virtually every OS on the market."
"It's good for reporting hardware and software."
"The tool's most valuable features have been its plug-and-play capability once configured and its reporting system is good. The most improved feature of asset auditing is its physical logging of all software. This allows us to understand what software and applications are installed on endpoints. We can easily check which software applications are installed in the network infrastructure during client processing or audits."
 

Cons

"The console interface is not friendly, and requires training before using it in production."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Relay selection and availability needs improvement as an incorrect relay selected can cause network chokes."
"I would like to see SDK for Web UI included in the next release."
"Sometimes the workstations communicate back to the BigFix server two or three days in a week or something similar. Sometimes there can be a delay reporting back to the server for a variety of reasons, such as users turning their computer off when they go home. When the user comes back and turns the computer back on BigFix needs to synchronize and sometimes it can take some time, approximately one week. The communication between the agent and the server should be faster, there is room for improvement in this area."
"The reporting structure could be a little more simplistic. Currently, it throws too many vulnerabilities. Some of them are not needed because they are only informational and limitations, and they are not of much help. It doesn't need to show us these things."
"The solution could improve by adding support drivers for different systems and equipment. When you have a lot of different computers if they could fix how to install any updates, firmware, or drivers for different systems or servers it would be good."
"The reporting still needs improvement since customers want specific reporting, such as N-1 month patching reports."
"The tool needs to be more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of BigFix could be lower. However, I am always seeking a lower price."
"Its price is very reasonable."
"I would stay with the Managed Virtual Server license model, which is a 1-to-1 license per OS whether it is virtual or physical."
"The product is less costly when compared to other solutions, and this is a good solid solution for what we have paid."
"There's not much big cost. We only have to pay the agents' cost for the server, and for the systems."
"You get what we call the Platform Edition, which you get for free. The patch service is maybe $0.50 per workstation per month. Then there's the basic server cost, which is about $1.50 per server per month. You also get into Lifecycle which does power management, OSD remote control, and those types of things, and that might be about 10 times the price - which works out to about $13 per server and, maybe $5 per workstation per month."
"So, the pricing is slightly more expensive than the others. I have to keep buying licenses every time I add a new device."
"We have a subscription-based contract with BigFix."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Patch Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,344 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Construction Company
6%
Construction Company
15%
Agriculture
10%
Transportation Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise68
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BigFix?
I rate the price for BigFix as medium, neither low nor high.
What needs improvement with BigFix?
There is one feature in BigFix called the automation patch policy that requires enhancement. When an action is initiated through the patch policy, it appears on the console but arrives in chunks. W...
What is your primary use case for BigFix?
My current use case involves being one of the products and one of the clients implementing this tool.
 

Also Known As

Tivoli Endpoint Manager
Thor Foresight Enterprise
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

US Foods, Penn State, St Vincent's Health US Foods, Sabadell Bank, SunTrust, Australia Sydney, Stemac, Capgemini, WNS Global Services, Jebsen & Jessen, CenterBeam, Strauss, Christian Hospital Centre, Brit Insurance, Career Education Corporation
Brother, Symbion, CPH West
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys, Microsoft, NinjaOne and others in Patch Management. Updated: July 2026.
908,344 professionals have used our research since 2012.