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

Absolute Secure Access vs iboss comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Absolute Secure Access
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
32nd
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (34th), ZTNA (40th)
iboss
Ranking in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) category, the mindshare of Absolute Secure Access is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.3%
Absolute Secure Access0.4%
Other97.3%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

Use Absolute Secure Access?
Leave a review
reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
23%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
8%
Comms Service Provider
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil. While iboss performed well, some competitors offered simpler implementati...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our old proxies to cloud proxies, and we did POCs with different giants at that time. ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alternatives available, but they do not perform as well. Since iboss is cloud-based,...
 

Also Known As

NetMotion , NetMotion Diagnostics, NetMotion Mobile IQ
iBoss Cloud Platform
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

4-County Electric Power Association
More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Netskope, Cato Networks and others in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE). Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.