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

HPE Wireless WAN vs Ubiquiti Wireless comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 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

HPE Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ubiquiti Wireless
Ranking in Wireless WAN
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Wireless WAN category, the mindshare of HPE Wireless WAN is 3.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ubiquiti Wireless is 33.8%, down from 40.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless WAN Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Ubiquiti Wireless33.8%
HPE Wireless WAN3.4%
Other62.800000000000004%
Wireless WAN
 

Featured Reviews

DineshDas - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager - Network Services at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Centralized features have simplified deployment and improved day-to-day network management
One of the best features of HPE Wireless WAN is Wi-Fi Direct, as it provides dual-band frequency and helps to connect Bluetooth with IoT devices. I am comfortable with this feature and find it beneficial for connectivity. I use centralized management features such as WLC. They have improved operational efficiency significantly. It is one of the best tools we have for centralized management because it is easy to manage, manually delete, and create sites. This makes it easy to implement policies across the network. I see measurable benefits from this centralized solution, which is quite easy to handle as people are comfortable managing the tool. Users do not need hardcore technical expertise to operate it on a day-to-day basis, making it quite comfortable.
Donald Ochanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Manager at Network Security and Crypto
Seamless coverage amplifies connectivity while enhanced responsiveness strengthens potential
We do not prefer Ubiquiti Wireless switches for more complex environments, not because they lack scalability, but because we haven't explored their products extensively. We are strong on their Wi-Fi solution. When implementing Wi-Fi for a campus, we use Cisco for the core backbone infrastructure, while implementing Ubiquiti Wireless for the Wi-Fi and controller. Perhaps we haven't discovered switches that would match our requirements, or maybe they exist but we haven't explored their capabilities fully. Regarding improvements to Ubiquiti Wireless, I cannot provide specific suggestions as I'm not an expert on Wi-Fi, as there is a dedicated team that handles Wi-Fi solutions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"HPE Wireless WAN provides reliable connectivity."
"HPE Wireless is easy to use. Integration is not an issue. It is easy to integrate HPE Wireless with any operating system and other brands of switches."
"They have improved operational efficiency significantly; it is one of the best tools we have for centralized management because it is easy to manage, manually delete, and create sites."
"The tool is easy to manage."
"It is a good and stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is flexibility."
"They have improved operational efficiency significantly; it is one of the best tools we have for centralized management because it is easy to manage, manually delete, and create sites."
"The most important is that the solution is stable."
"We use the solution for many of our smaller customers and the cloud management aspect of the solution is very good. If you compare it to other vendors that have a controller, it's much easier to manage the cloud-based solution because we travel a lot. It allows us to manage everything from any place."
"Ubiquiti devices are centrally managed, and you can log into the access points via SSH. If the GUI isn't working for some reason, you can intervene via SSH."
"The solution's software controller is very nice and provides good advantages."
"The product is extremely stable."
"In general, the setup process is straightforward."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is rated ten out of ten for stability."
"The setup is quite simple."
"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 antennas."
 

Cons

"The solution works smoothly unless more than twenty users connect to a single access point, at which point it becomes overloaded."
"There are some areas that need improvement, such as connectivity issues and additional features that other products have."
"It's very old-fashioned, which is why we have made the decision to replace it."
"The price of HPE Wireless WAN should be reduced."
"Sometimes it can be difficult to find the right sizing."
"It should be a faster device."
"I would say that the integration with other vendors in areas such as management or the visibility of other vendors in the management tools could be improved."
"Integration might be improved, particularly with a single sign-on for Active Directory."
"Maybe our Ruckus access points are easier to deploy. 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. Ruckus seems easier to deploy for the moment."
"I would like to see this solution have any kind of captive portal on the tool or user accounting tool. This would be quite useful for companies."
"Tech support is mostly remote and could be better."
"Better third-party integration would be helpful because often, Ubiquity is a product that customers choose after they already have something else from another vendor like HPE."
"Difficult to see error logs and locate the problem."
"I would like local support from the parent company."
"The cost is on the higher side and could be lower."
"Ubiquiti is also slow to adopt new technologies. We are transitioning to Wi-Fi 6, and there aren't many products. They have mostly Wi-Fi 5 products, but there are only two Wi-Fi 6 products. It's okay for places we have already equipped, but it's a bit hard for new places."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The license cost of the product falls under the category of a moderately priced tool."
"The price of HPE Wireless WAN is high."
"We don't pay a licensing fee, we purchased the product."
"Customers pay for HPE Wireless WAN based on the contract. It's usually paid yearly. There's an additional cost, particularly for the hardware."
"If you are concerned with your budget, then you can go for the cheaper model."
"The solution is quite expensive. You have to pay for every node and it can get expensive fast, it is approximately £3,000 per month."
"We have been satisfied with the price."
"There is a license for this solution and the license is normally paid annually but this depends on the contract."
"There are no licensing fees for this solution, but the cost is on the higher side."
"Its price is reasonable for a basic device."
"We initially spent around 10,000 euros on this solution and have been running it for several years. An access point costs approximately 160 to 180 euros."
"The product is around $300 or $400 depending on the device. It's a one-time fee. There aren't ongoing licensing costs."
"We mostly use Ubiquiti solutions due to their affordable price."
"We don't have any licensing costs in our use-case. It's low cost, perhaps not the leading edge in the industry, but for the type of industry we work in, the cost suits us perfectly. It's aggressive on price so we can make a margin deploying it, and we can make money managing it for our clients."
"Right now the product is less expensive and of higher quality than other solutions."
"I rate the price of Ubiquiti Wireless a three out of five."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise18
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HPE Wireless WAN?
I am not in a position to fully address what can be improved for HPE Wireless WAN currently. However, there are some areas that need improvement, such as connectivity issues and additional features...
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 - 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...
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...
 

Also Known As

Wireless WAN, HP Wireless WAN
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bell Canada
NASCAR Grand-AM, Maritime Parc, Outdoor Music Festival, British Armed Forces, Arcadia School District, Moscow - Enforta
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.