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

Portnox vs Ruckus Cloudpath 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

Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA (11th), Passwordless Authentication (2nd)
Ruckus Cloudpath
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Portnox is 3.3%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ruckus Cloudpath is 1.9%, up 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 solution has a valuable reporting feature."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice."
"I am impressed with the solution's voucher capability and authentication. The tool is integrated with Active Direct storage."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"The solution is easy to use, well designed, robust, and has good traffic capacity."
"I find the solution to be very rich in features."
"The solution has good features for authentication, policies, and allowing users to self-provision devices for network access via their logins."
"I have found it easy to use with no significant issues once the small initial problems were resolved."
"The ease of use is great, and the automation wizards can do a lot."
"Ruckus Cloudpath is very stable."
"The wireless devices are used to control access, transmit messages, and integrate with the main system."
"Ruckus Cloudpath is effective for network security since it points out errors, especially when working with APIs."
 

Cons

"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"It might be beneficial to improve the ease of integrating the product with firewalls."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"I believe there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of integration."
"In terms of operational efficiency, things are more complicated now. It takes more time to get devices on the network, but we increased security quite a bit."
"The price could be better."
"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."
"It could be a little cheaper."
"The setup process is a bit complex."
"The setup had a few initial small problems, however, everything was resolved and it is very good now."
"The hardest part we've had to deal with is trying to find some physical product recently as everything is going like hotcakes."
"The scalability could be better."
"There is room for improvement in deployment."
"I believe the solution is missing some great features which are present in other solutions like Aruba, UiPath, and Cisco ISE."
"The solution could improve by adding more detailed information that customers have available on the dashboards."
"There is room for improvement in deployment. I would like to see more effort put into troubleshooting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The vendor price is fair."
"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 quite reasonable."
"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 bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
"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."
"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 pricing is a little bit high."
"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.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
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?
The pricing of Ruckus Cloudpath is on the expensive side. I would rate the pricing as an eight out of ten, with ten being very expensive.
What needs improvement with Ruckus Cloudpath?
Ruckus Cloudpath needs more API features and enhanced automation capabilities. I would like to improve the automation aspect, ensuring that if any issues arise or alerts are detected, the cloud pla...
 

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: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.