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

Cambium Networks Wireless WAN vs Ubiquiti Wireless comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
9.0
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN offers excellent ROI with quick payback, enhanced by automation reducing workload and boosting efficiency.
Sentiment score
6.7
Ubiquiti Wireless is valued for affordability and longevity, despite minor upgrade and support challenges requiring specific user knowledge.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN offers reliable customer service, though users suggest improvements in efficiency and initiating support.
Sentiment score
5.2
Ubiquiti Wireless customer service is responsive yet inconsistent, with varied satisfaction and reliance on online resources.
Their technical support is excellent.
I didn't have any issues with Ubiquiti support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN offers impressive scalability, accommodating diverse sectors with potential for expansion and favorable user experience.
Sentiment score
7.6
Ubiquiti Wireless is scalable and versatile, ideal for small to medium deployments, but faces challenges in larger environments.
Ubiquiti Wireless offers large scalability, which is very important for our company as we have multiple sites that need to be interconnected and managed effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is praised for stability and uptime, though some minor issues exist with the 2.4 GHz network.
Sentiment score
7.4
Ubiquiti Wireless is reliable and stable, though some users face issues in crowded areas or after updates.
This solution has excellent uptime.
Ubiquiti Wireless is rated ten out of ten for stability.
 

Room For Improvement

Cambium Networks Wireless WAN struggles with high pricing, poor signal, complex setup, insufficient support, and requires better integration and stability.
Ubiquiti Wireless needs better support, security, integration, advanced features, and improved setup, scalability, coverage, and product availability.
Although the development of high throughput radios is ongoing, due to government of India licensing issues, the deployment is affected.
The user interface could be made more intuitive.
Enterprise users require more details and options.
When I want to deploy a Ubiquiti access point with the centralized appliance, we can't do all the configuration in our lab and send it to the shop.
 

Setup Cost

Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is mid-range, often pricey in some regions, with costs involving hardware but no licensing fees.
Ubiquiti Wireless offers cost-effective, reliable wireless solutions appealing to small businesses, with no licensing fees and competitive pricing.
Ubiquiti Wireless is cheaper.
The equipment is priced relatively high, though the value it provides makes it worth the cost.
 

Valuable Features

Cambium Networks Wireless WAN offers easy setup, robust performance, cost-effectiveness, cloud management, and scalability, making it highly preferred.
Ubiquiti Wireless delivers easy setup, strong performance, affordability, and reliability, making it ideal for small businesses.
The solution offers excellent product performance, long-distance coverage, and link reliability.
All the access points provide good connectivity and are reliable.
Since implementing Ubiquiti Wireless, I have seen improvements in connection security, wireless speed, and overall network stability.
Compared to Ruckus, we have not yet seen all benefits for all users and for administration.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cambium Networks Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ubiquiti Wireless
Ranking in Wireless WAN
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Wireless WAN category, the mindshare of Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is 12.6%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ubiquiti Wireless is 40.9%, up from 39.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless WAN
 

Q&A Highlights

SN
May 02, 2023
 

Featured Reviews

Arup Kumar Koley - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable performance and long-distance coverage enhance connectivity
We have been associated with Cambium since its days as a Motorola product, for more than 20 years. The solution offers excellent product performance, long-distance coverage, and link reliability. No nearby product is available for distance and performance that can compete with Cambium. The uptime and reliability of the product are also excellent.
Sachin Vinay - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple to set up and good outdoor accessibility but does not penetrate rooms well indoors
Ubiquiti requires more improvement in wireless penetration. It has significantly less penetration in indoor devices. When it comes to indoor devices, Ubiquiti Wireless does not have penetration power, so when we deploy it in closed rooms, it fails to connect. This is one drawback that has to improve. When indoor access points failed to penetrate into rooms, we had to deploy single access points in each room, which seemed to be really costly. Still, when compared to Fortinet, it has an outdoor access point model also. The outdoor access point is relatively stable in comparison. The solution needs to offer more scalability. It does not have traffic shaping or traffic policies in its wireless requirements. We have to completely depend on an additional firewall for traffic shaping and policies.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Cambium or Ubiquiti Wireless?
For me, Ubiquiti was easy to install, configure, set up, and maintain, while also providing solid coverage and better handoffs between APs. This is especially relevant if you are using Apple produc...
What do you like most about Cambium?
The most valuable features for network performance in the solution are reliability and centralized management through a single controller.
Is Ubiquiti Wireless better than Ruckus Wireless WAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up and is an excellent option for small businesses, offering enterprise features for a one-time fee and no ongoing licensing fees. Ubiquiti Wireless is ve...
Which is better - Ubiquiti Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless offers a wide range of WLAN products. We tested their devices before ultimately choosing Cisco Meraki. Ubiquiti devices have good outdoor performance and the connection is very st...
What do you like most about Ubiquiti Wireless?
We had a client with a power plant. Different wireless devices from various brands caused problems. We fixed it using the Ubiquiti Wireless UDM controller and installed 75 access points and antenna...
 

Also Known As

Cambium PMP Series, Cambium ePMP Series
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Wireless Etc, Agricultural Technology Company in Brazil, Redfox, SKYNET, HOUSTON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, APPLEBEE’S
NASCAR Grand-AM, Maritime Parc, Outdoor Music Festival, British Armed Forces, Arcadia School District, Moscow - Enforta
Find out what your peers are saying about Cambium Networks Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.