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

GFI LanGuard vs Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 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

GFI LanGuard
Ranking in Patch Management
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Quest KACE Systems Manageme...
Ranking in Patch Management
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Client Desktop Management (6th), Endpoint Compliance (7th), Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Patch Management category, the mindshare of GFI LanGuard is 3.1%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) is 5.4%, down from 6.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Patch Management
 

Featured Reviews

Ted Mbugua - PeerSpot reviewer
Improves network visibility and keeps our products up to date with the latest patches
This is a solution that I recommend. In fact, those without it are at a disadvantage when it comes to managing their network. The biggest lesson that I have learned is in terms of visibility. GFI LanGuard has given me a wakeup call in terms of what is happening on endpoint machines. However, it is more than just having visibility. It is about having control in terms of what you want to block and what you're able to block. It keeps our network stable in that there are no running applications that you don't even know you have. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Scott Tweed - PeerSpot reviewer
Low maintenance, reliable, and easy to create packages
I like how when you click on the device, it shows you everything that has changed as well as the software versioning. I am really enjoying the inventory aspect of it. The deployment process for both deploying and creating a package is straightforward. I believe the inventory in KACE is superior to SCCM's. I know with SCCM I could do things like remote console into machines via the agent's remote console, but that is not a feature that is provided in KACE. I know that at least in the Systems Management Appliance, I can't get to it. I'm not sure how distribution works, with distribution points. I'm not sure if KACE has that feature. You could use an SCCM to set up distribution points at remote sites so that they don't have to download patches or software from across the country. If you have a DP or something similar, they could pull it down.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"The most valuable features of GFI LanGuard are the vulnerability assessment, it provides us with substantial insight into what applications are running on the endpoint systems and what vulnerabilities are there in the running applications. The second would be the assets tracking. I'm able to see in the network whether my endpoint server is operating and if all the other IT equipment is running in the environment. Additionally, GFI LanGuard is not heavy on system resources. It gives a competitive advantage over others."
"The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"The scripting part increases IT productivity because of the specialized software in our environments for students' courses. You need to use software which is not programmed by developers. A lot of software for building houses or other things is developed by normal guys, who do not have much skill in programming. When you need to install this type of software, it is very difficult. You have to install registry keys, etc. For that, it is very good to use the scripting part of this solution. So, you can automate this part as well."
"It also does patch management. At the moment, I'm rolling out a new feature update, 20.8.2, and it's a great challenge because we have to deploy it to 1,200 computers in the home office. We want to do it without interrupting production, but KACE is reliable and it's easy to adapt it to my needs for how and when to deploy the feature update."
"The service desk can be configured and customized to better serve our environment."
"KACE has made our life much easier since we got off the Microsoft solution. The Microsoft solution was a lot harder to image over different ports and stuff. They would only have this one place where we could do all the imaging. Now, we have a whole building where we can image from. This means that we can image from our storage area, where we have a place to do our imaging. We can also image right at our desks, which is a lot easier."
"The ability to build scripts right on the deployment center itself, as well as building groups that take those scripts/task chains has been absolutely invaluable and one of the most important parts of my whole environment."
"The ability to push an image to a machine, wake that image up, and just blast a new image to a computer without even having to touch it, and then push the software to that machine. This just made things so much more convenient for us and so much more efficient."
"There is one place for a lot of different things. If somebody has a problem with their computer, they will put in a ticket. From there, we will know who it is and the assets assigned to them, because there is one place to go look for what we are talking about and with whom we are talking. Just having one place for everything is really convenient. For example, we are able to deploy software to hundreds of computers. We don't need to go to each individual device."
"Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding more modules, such as asset control or asset inventory."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding asset tracking."
"GFI LanGuard could improve the rollback feature. If we have installed the wrong we have had some issues with the rollback function. Additionally, more input from GFI LanGuard for the custom software push install."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"GFI LanGuard has some technical limitations with machines."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"The problem is that it's harder to directly emulate a lot of the stuff that the group policies do, using the KACE solution. With regular group policies, you just specify the various settings you want to change on the workstations, and then you specify the workstations and—while it's kind of an ugly mess—it does it. Whereas on KACE, you really have to know what you're doing with scripting to effectively script those exact same changes."
"There is always room for improvement. However, the system does most of what we need at this moment."
"What could be improved is the possibility to use replicas in a secure way outside our network in order to maintain the machines that never connect to our corporate network."
"Scalability is my primary concern right now."
"It is a little bit difficult to use the license compliances because you need to decide when you are using the software catalog if you are using it with their license compliance or the normal software part. Under the inventory, you can use software as a menu link or software catalog. Most of my specialist software is not in the software catalog. When I try to import them, in my license compliances overview, there are cryptic names for this software that I have to import. That is not very good for the reports that I use. When I take them to my bosses, they see cryptic names of software that they don't understand. It would be much better for me if I could use software and the software catalog as well for the license compliances."
"I would like for there to be improvement when it comes to Microsoft and Windows updates. It has the ability to do it but the control of it is not there like I have in the Windows Server Update Services. The way KACE does it is still very granular. You don't really see the process like it is in the Windows Server Update Services. I think that would be one of the biggest things that I would like to see KACE really put some work into and really make that a big enhancement."
"The GUI needs some work. I love all that it can do, however, it can be just be so cluttered at times."
"I would like them to implement VBScript language in KACE Systems Management. Currently, we can only use PowerShell."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a scale of one to five, with one being expensive and five being competitive, I would rate the price as a four."
"GFI LanGuard cost approximately $1,000 annually to use the solution."
"GFI LanGuard has very fair pricing compared to other similar solutions out there."
"GFI LanGuard isn't expensive."
"We are a gold partner and we receive favorable discounts. The price of GFI LanGuard is competitive. When you evaluate other solutions, such as ManageEngine."
"I rate the pricing of GFI LanGuard a four out of five."
"We pay annually for technical support."
"It may be more expensive, but you get what you pay for."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"The cost of KACE has been relatively low compared to other systems. Even if those systems have the same cost, they do not do as much of the third-party patching that KACE natively does."
"We are also saving on the licensing fee, compared to other endpoint management solutions."
"Based on other solutions that we had implemented, its pricing seems to be quite competitive. It is not inexpensive, but it is also not more expensive than any other solution. They have the standard licensing fees and support fees."
"The pricing is great. It's billed annually and it's very reasonable."
"We buy consulting fees from Software Factory, then we pay extra for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Patch Management solutions are best for your needs.
848,989 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Photography Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
11%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GFI LanGuard?
The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature.
What needs improvement with GFI LanGuard?
The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes. Instead of directly white listing...
What is your primary use case for GFI LanGuard?
Internally, as a user, I use GFI LanGuard for email and web monitoring.
What do you like most about Quest KACE Systems Management?
My company had bought some new machines. We used the tool to do some basic settings to ship every machine the same way and undertake the Windows deployment. We did the scripted installation. The to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest KACE Systems Management?
The pricing is in the middle range of the market, not too expensive but not the cheapest either.
What needs improvement with Quest KACE Systems Management?
The user interface needs improvement as customers have mentioned they do not like the interface since it is not an SMA-based interface and lacks a manual configuration option.
 

Also Known As

LanGuard
Dell KACE Systems Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BayView Medical Clinic, FrugalBrothers Software, Zaw, National Theatre, American Red Cross
Waypoint, Mattos Filho, Meetic, Gems Education, Green Clinic HealthSystem, Service King
Find out what your peers are saying about GFI LanGuard vs. Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,989 professionals have used our research since 2012.