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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 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

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
141
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Man...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (19th), SSL VPN (5th), Remote Access (13th), Access Management (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is 28.4%, down from 31.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Ashish Kumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers remote access control, good GUI and easy to configure
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The user experience of the solution is great. It's a very transparent system."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"The solution enables us to do everything from one interface."
"Technical support is okay."
"I like the logging feature."
"The solution cuts down on the repercussions of getting malware or ransomware."
"When we use ISE, one of the helpful things is that I can go through the dashboard and get every step along the way of how a device was authenticated. If it's failing, why did it fail? Why is it unauthorized? If there's an error, what is the error and how can I fix that error? If it's something that, if they should be passing, why are they failing?"
"The biggest value of ISE is that it can get so granular with gaming systems, versus IoT and BYOD."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"We have seen a return on investment from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager. It provided access at a time when we didn't have it."
"The most valuable feature is the virtual IP creation. It's our most frequently used feature."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
 

Cons

"The knocks I have against the product are the number of bugs that we encounter, constantly, and the amount of upgrading that we have to do."
"The solution is not so user-friendly."
"ISE is a little clunky. The front-end feels like it is from the 1980s."
"I would like to see the product simplified more, especially with the configuration."
"Sometimes, there are instances when Cisco ISE simply fails to function without any apparent reason, and regardless of the investigation we undertake, the logs indicate that everything is functioning properly, making it somewhat inexplicable."
"It would be nice if it could be configured easily by default."
"The customer server was great but it would have been better for me if they had support in other languages such as Spanish."
"Cisco ISE is very complex and not very easy to deploy."
"We do not have knowledgeable support teams locally."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"The solution is quite costly."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The technical support’s response time must be improved."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution requires an annual license and it is a bit expensive than competitors."
"The solution is not that cheap."
"The price is okay."
"It is fair."
"It has a fair price. It is better than it was before."
"Cisco is moving towards a subscription service, which would mean additional costs."
"I have complaints. I don't enjoy the licensing model. Once we moved from 2.7 to 3.1, switching from Base, Plus, and Apex to Essential and Advantage in Premier, we went from a perpetual, with our base licenses, to now a subscription-base. So, we will have to renew those licenses every year, and I'm not a fan of that for our base licenses. Apex/Premier, we already expected, which is fine, but for basic connectivity, I am not a fan of that."
"The licensing can be confusing, but it is still pretty good."
"The tool is a little bit expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"The product is very expensive."
"Recently, they have simplified the licensing"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
28%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work.
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
Regarding price, I'm not directly involved in purchasing, but our CIO thinks the product is very expensive. He's considering moving from the tool to Citrix NetScaler WAF because it's cheaper, and w...
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
F5 Access Policy Manager
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
City Bank, Ricacorp Properties, Miele, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.