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

Portnox vs Ruckus Cloudpath comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 27, 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

Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA (11th), Passwordless Authentication (4th)
Ruckus Cloudpath
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Portnox is 2.8%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ruckus Cloudpath is 1.8%, 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 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Xander Janse Van Rensburg - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"The cloud-based feature of Portnox is excellent."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The cloud-based feature of Portnox is excellent."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice. We use Meraki for our switching, and it is simple to point all of our networks and offices to Portnox. It is pretty seamless."
"Ruckus Cloudpath is very stable."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"Ruckus technical support is very good and helpful whenever we need them."
"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."
"I have found it easy to use with no significant issues once the small initial problems were resolved."
"The wireless devices are used to control access, transmit messages, and integrate with the main system."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"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."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"There is room for improvement in deployment."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
"There is room for improvement in deployment. I would like to see more effort put into troubleshooting."
"The scalability could be better."
"The setup had a few initial small problems, however, everything was resolved and it is very good now."
"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 solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The vendor price is fair."
"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."
"The tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"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."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
"The pricing is a little bit high."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Educational Organization
7%
Construction Company
7%
 

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.
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.
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...
What do you like most about Ruckus Cloudpath?
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 an...
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 ...
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...
 

Also Known As

Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Portnox vs. Ruckus Cloudpath and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.