Portnox vs Ruckus Cloudpath comparison

Portnox Security and Ruckus are both solutions in the Network Access Control (NAC) category. Portnox Security is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.8, while Ruckus is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.5. Portnox Security holds a 2.6% mindshare in NAC, compared to Ruckus’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Portnox Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ruckus users who would recommend it.

Portnox

Read 21 Portnox reviews

1,639 Views
877 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Ruckus Cloudpath

Read 7 Ruckus Cloudpath reviews

1,214 Views
717 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Portnox

Ruckus Cloudpath

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 27, 2024

Portnox and Ruckus Cloudpath are key competitors in the network access control and security sector. Portnox seems to have the upper hand in pricing and support, appealing to users focused on cost-effectiveness and responsive service. On the other hand, Ruckus Cloudpath presents a more feature-rich offering, making it a strong option for those valuing extensive features and willing to invest more for added capabilities.

Features: Portnox provides robust network security with manageable NAC solutions focusing on automation and easy policy enforcement. It simplifies integration with existing network devices, ensuring streamlined network management. Additionally, Portnox's intuitive dashboards enhance user experience by providing clear insights and visibility across network activities. Ruckus Cloudpath stands out with its extensive scalability, seamlessly supporting high volumes of devices without performance degradation. Feature highlights include its efficient onboarding process, simplifying the connection of multiple devices securely. It also offers advanced security policy management, promoting comprehensive, secure infrastructure for organizations.

Room for Improvement: Portnox could enhance its feature depth to cater to more complex security needs and expand its scalability options to support larger enterprises better. Further development in automation capabilities would also augment its competitive edge. Meanwhile, Ruckus Cloudpath could benefit from a more user-friendly interface to ease navigation for novice users. Pricing structuring that favors diverse organizational sizes may also improve its appeal. Additionally, offering more responsive technical support could address customer concerns more swiftly.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Portnox boasts an intuitive deployment experience backed by responsive customer service, facilitating user-friendly operation. It enables quick implementation without requiring extensive technical knowledge, leading to a smooth user experience. Ruckus Cloudpath also offers straightforward deployment processes, but with added versatility to handle complex security scenarios. Impressive customer support assists in overcoming deployment challenges, particularly for organizations with intricate security needs.

Pricing and ROI: Portnox's competitive pricing model is designed to maximize ROI through low entry and operational costs, making it ideal for budget-conscious organizations. It delivers tangible economic benefits with minimal financial strain. Ruckus Cloudpath, with a higher initial cost, promises substantial ROI through comprehensive features and enhanced security. It appeals to organizations prepared to invest more for a robust security infrastructure, anticipating long-term security benefits and reduced risk.

To learn more, read our detailed Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

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

Portnox

Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)

7th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

ZTNA (11th), Passwordless Authentication (4th)

Ruckus Cloudpath

Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)

10th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Portnox is 2.6%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ruckus Cloudpath is 1.7%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Access Control (NAC)

Featured Reviews

Scott Kerr

President at TrackerSoft

It is seamless and integrates well with our Azure setup

We use devices like PLCs and controllers, and when we receive a request to allow one on the network, we bypass typical authentication, associate it with a group account, and push it to a firewalled VLAN. However, problems arise when the same MAC address is requested for a different project. Our current system only finds authenticated MAC addresses, making it difficult to troubleshoot when the same device is used for multiple purposes. Ideally, we should be able to search for any MAC address in the database, regardless of its authentication status, to see all its associated groups and potential conflicts.

Read full review

Xander Janse Van Rensburg

Head Of Technical Services at Emtelle

Helps to onboard corporate users based on certificate-based authentication

The tool's most valuable features include the phenomenal functionality of DPSK. The ease of use, particularly when it is correctly set up, is remarkably simple. Tracking users is straightforward and dynamic. This allows us to identify where a user might encounter issues within the process. Its most valuable feature is CA certification. You cannot get access without this. The tool's device policy enforcement feature has had a positive impact on customer network security. Customers are now more at ease, knowing that their employees connect to a secure network, and unauthorized individuals cannot easily access the corporate network. Overall, it has positively influenced their security measures. The user experience when connecting to networks via Ruckus Cloudpath is seamless. I would highly recommend it to anyone in need of an onboarding system for multiple users. Whether you want to move away from the standard connection, Active Directory, or even free keys, it is a reliable choice. Additionally, the product's licensing is user-based, not device-based. This means that regardless of the number of devices, the licensing is per-user.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the fact that you can take your device anywhere and still have that visibility from anywhere because it's agent-based."

"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."

"The cloud-based feature is very nice."

"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."

"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."

"The solution has a valuable reporting feature."

"It's a stable product."

"This is a self-sufficient network monitoring and security product that saves time and employee resources."

More Portnox pros

"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."

"I have found it easy to use with no significant issues once the small initial problems were resolved."

"I find the solution to be very rich in features."

"The tool's most valuable features include the phenomenal functionality of DPSK. The ease of use, particularly when it is correctly set up, is remarkably simple. Tracking users is straightforward and dynamic. This allows us to identify where a user might encounter issues within the process."

"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."

"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."

"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."

"The wireless devices are used to control access, transmit messages, and integrate with the main system."

Cons

"Allowing for a search of MAC addresses in the interface, whether they are authenticated on the network or not, would be beneficial. Currently, it only finds authenticated MAC addresses, which complicates troubleshooting when the same MAC address is used for different requests."

"I believe there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of integration."

"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."

"As there are no agents in Portnox Clear, the customers of the product cannot download any agents on their devices, making them unsure if the product offers proper security."

"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."

"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."

"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."

"The support team is very limited. They don't have much support during Asia Pacific hours; the team sits in during the EMI and US hours."

More Portnox cons

"The tool needs to support multi-vendor environments. Currently, my experience with it has been primarily within Ruckus environments. However, I haven't explored it for multi-vendor scenarios. It would be great to see newer builds that are multi-vendor capable of full integration."

"The scalability could be better."

"The setup process is a bit complex."

"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."

"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."

"The setup had a few initial small problems, however, everything was resolved and it is very good now."

"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing module should be reviewed to count the number of devices instead of port numbers of total switches. There is a case for this where not all ports for a switch are used by devices. Unused ports are calculated in the license, then the customer pays for license for those unused ports."

"It is not bad. It is a bit on the high side, but considering the cloud features and how much it costs to run the instance in the cloud, it is not unreasonable. We do have RADIUS servers for the US, Asia, and Europe."

"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."

"Portnox CORE's pricing is adequate and cheaper compared to other complex solutions. Its licensing costs are yearly and include support. Cost is calculated per device."

"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."

"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."

"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."

"The vendor price is fair."

More Portnox pricing and cost advice

"I would rate the tool's pricing as a seven on a scale of one to ten. Compared to others, it's not overly expensive, but it does come with a cost. Since it's a licensed-based product, it can become expensive, especially if there is a need for additional licenses."

"The licensing of the solution is user-based and the price is good."

"The cost was somewhere around $700 for the access points, however, there was a discount."

"The pricing is a little bit high."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Healthcare Company

Comms Service Provider

13%

Computer Software Company

13%

Educational Organization

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Portnox CORE?

It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox CORE?

It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle, so I'll probably give it a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Portnox CORE?

We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE. At the end of the day, Portnox Clear's capabilities are much more...

See all answers

What do you like most about Ruckus Cloudpath?

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ruckus Cloudpath?

I would rate the tool's pricing as a seven on a scale of one to ten. Compared to others, it's not overly expensive, but it does come with a cost. Since it's a licensed-based product, it can become ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ruckus Cloudpath?

The tool needs to support multi-vendor environments. Currently, my experience with it has been primarily within Ruckus environments. However, I haven't explored it for multi-vendor scenarios. It wo...

See all answers

Comparisons

Aruba ClearPass vs Portnox

Compared 33% of the time

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Portnox

Compared 30% of the time

Fortinet FortiNAC vs Portnox

Compared 19% of the time

Forescout Platform vs Portnox

Compared 15% of the time

SecureW2 vs Portnox

Compared 4% of the time

More Portnox Competitors

Aruba ClearPass vs Ruckus Cloudpath

Compared 61% of the time

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs Ruckus Cloudpath

Compared 23% of the time

Fortinet FortiNAC vs Ruckus Cloudpath

Compared 16% of the time

More Ruckus Cloudpath Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Portnox

January 2025

Download Portnox product report

Buyer's Guide

Network Access Control (NAC)

December 2024

Download Ruckus Cloudpath product report

Also Known As

Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR

No data available

Learn More

Portnox Security

Ruckus

Interactive Demo

Portnox Security

Demo not available

Ruckus

Overview

Portnox offers Network Access Control to manage user access based on policy, securing both wired and wireless networks while ensuring compliance. It supports endpoint security and prevents unauthorized access across industries such as banking, IT, and energy distribution.

Designed for both on-premises and cloud deployments through CORE and Clear versions, Portnox delivers a straightforward interface aiding in deployment. It integrates effectively with equipment from multiple vendors and security solutions, enhancing endpoint profiling and ensuring compliance. Portnox provides real-time alerts and network activity insights, bolstered by excellent technical support and scalability. It also automates monitoring, reducing the need for dedicated resources while offering a comprehensive view of network activities.

What are the essential features of Portnox?

Comprehensive Network Visibility: Delivers detailed insights into network activity.
Agentless Operation: Simplifies deployment without requiring additional software on endpoints.
Seamless Integration: Works well with diverse equipment and security systems.
Real-Time Alerts: Immediate notifications for unauthorized activities.
Scalability: Accommodates growing network needs without adding complexity.

What benefits should users focus on in Portnox reviews?

Ease of Deployment: Quick setup without complex processes.
Security Capabilities: Strong defense against unauthorized access and breaches.
Automatic Monitoring: Continuously observes network traffic, requiring fewer resources.
Intuitive Insights: Clear visualization of network operations aids decision-making.
Reliable Support: Access to helpful technical assistance when needed.

Across industries like banking and IT, organizations rely on Portnox for endpoint profiling and compliance, ensuring remote worker security. Electricity distributors leverage its robust features for managing secure network access. Improvements like better third-party integration, enhanced graphical interface, and expanded support are desired, along with licensing adjustment and expanded use of AI and behavioral analytics.

Cloudpath Enrollment System is a software/SaaS platform that delivers secure wired and wireless network access for BYOD, guest users and IT-owned devices. It streamlines getting devices on the network and secures every connection with powerful encryption. Cloudpath software gives you granular policy control over what network resources users can access. It lets you deliver a great end-user experience and virtually eliminates helpdesk tickets related to network access. Choose from cloud-based or virtualized on-premises deployment. Cloudpath software supports any user, any device, and any network infrastructure.

Sample Customers

Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines,

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath

January 2025

Free Report: Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath

Find out what your peers are saying about Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath report.

See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.

We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.