No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ARCON Privileged Access Management vs Symantec Privileged Access Manager comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 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

ARCON Privileged Access Man...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Symantec Privileged Access ...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of ARCON Privileged Access Management is 2.1%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Privileged Access Manager is 2.0%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ARCON Privileged Access Management2.1%
Symantec Privileged Access Manager2.0%
Other95.9%
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

DS
System and DBA at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Enhanced security through session monitoring and activity recording
From an end-user point of view, it would be beneficial if the system could provide information about the last login. This would help identify if the server was accessed by me or if someone has potentially stolen my credentials. It would provide a clearer picture of whether ARCON Privileged Access Management is accessed by an authentic user.
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior technical Consultant at CA Africa
Secure management of sensitive servers and seamless applications with direct linking
The credential injection feature is highly valued, particularly for RDP sessions. A majority of customers use it for RDP, and a couple for Linux servers. The broader capabilities, including access to multiple systems, web-based applications, and clustering, have never posed an issue. The threat analytics aspect is also a robust feature that analyzes all pertinent information.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The technical support is excellent."
"For compliance, each change I do, in each of the servers, is clearly recorded. We recently faced an audit and this was an awesome feature. Even our auditor had praise for it saying, "This is really a good feature.""
"Technical support is good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten."
"With this log available, we can drill down to the activities performed by the people within our kiosk. There is a great feature where in the case of Unix servers, we have our own text-based logs. In the case of Window's server, we cannot create a text-based log, so our kiosk takes the screenshot or picture of the screen when I am working. It does this every three seconds."
"The password vaulting is robust."
"ARCON will give you all the features in a very cost-effective solution."
"Pricing and licensing are good, very aggressive."
"For that reason we introduced the PAM solution and it's working extremely well."
"One of the key things for us about the product is around its simplicity. Being able to put in the technology that allows the business to remove complexity and also allow the security improvements."
"The interface is very friendly, colorful, and bold."
"Transparent login and cluster synchronization are quite stable compared with other products, and it is easy to manage for the administrator."
"CA PAM is working well for us."
"The best features are the comprehensive coverage of the required features for the PAM solution like a credential vault, a session recording, an endpoint agent, security analytics."
"When we started analyzing different products, CA was really good."
"The key benefits are we improve our governance. We ensure we can build more trust in the way we run and operate our environment, and most of all is the accountability."
"We found that the architecture is scalable and very resilient."
 

Cons

"Scalability could be improved."
"ARCON Privileged Access Management is not a user-friendly solution, and the application flow from one screen to another is very complex."
"There are some features lacking but they typically are added when the upgrades are released."
"Anti-bridging should be built into product."
"The only thing is, while the product is good, they could do something on the support side."
"If you take Microsoft hypervisor - which comes with its own interface, its own web layer, etc. - something like that also requires privileged IDs. As per our institution policy now, everything has to come through ARCON. We have demanded that these kind of advanced features also should be there."
"For the in-house built applications, they need to provide good, solid access through their portal."
"It would be helpful to have a "Favorites" list. For example, if I have 100 servers but I only go to 10 servers frequently, a Favorites list would allow me to go through those ten servers only."
"Reporting is very limited."
"The first setup was complex. The implementation, to me, was very bad."
"The user interface and dependence on applets and Windows could use some improvement."
"They should include some assignments in the test environment to explore the product's features."
"The service account management functionality needs to be extended to application pools, SQL database, PowerShell scripts, service account discovery, etc."
"Yes, at first the cluster desynchronizes often."
"We have to do a lot of manual work to automate features."
"Stability is a problem that we fight every day."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ARCON is a will give you all the features in a very cost-effective solution. Pricing and licensing is very good compared to other players in the market."
"I am not in a position to give any financials, but whatever we have paid, it is value for money. Their licensing model is good. They have been flexible for us."
"The licensing is simple, and there are only two types licensing: device licensing and user-based licensing."
"We have a subscription to use this solution."
"They do have some licenses, which are required for things like Linux servers. However, in my environment, we do not have Linux servers."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"Pricing is low and licensing is flexible."
"The product is available with competitive pricing. Licensing is not complex. We calculated the license requirements by counting the number of admins and the number of devices which were going to integrate with it."
"Pricing is fair compared to other top vendors."
"Don’t go with an agent model. Don’t go with a model that has you buying a thousand different parts. Go with PAM that gives you everything, or you’ll just be paying costs of implementing another tool that PAM would have just given you up front."
"Cost-wise, CA was better compared to others in the market. ​"
"It is more expensive than other solutions on the market."
"They offer per-device, per-user, or monthly and yearly licensing models."
"The licensing is simple and scalable."
"The prices are not low, but one can ask for a discount. It’s not the cheapest PAM solution."
"The version we are using is affordable compared to BeyondTrust, which is maybe three to four times as expensive, but it depends on the features."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
18%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise30
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ARCON Privileged Access Management?
From an end-user point of view, it would be beneficial if the system could provide information about the last login. This would help identify if the server was accessed by me or if someone has pote...
What is your primary use case for ARCON Privileged Access Management?
Currently, I access our server through the R-Course application, which serves as a part of RDP, Remote ( /products/remote-reviews ) Desktop. However, I connect to my RDP server through the ARCON Pr...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Due to the nature of the solution, it is hard to gauge, but compared to competitors, the pricing is very good. I would rate it as an eight and a half out of ten.
What needs improvement with Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
Recent releases need improvement in webpage management. For instance, navigating through a webpage that acts like a wizard, where I proceed to the next page and enter more information, is not handl...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Privileged Access Manager?
With the customers that I have so far, I help them broker RDP sessions to sensitive servers, particularly those that manage aspects like physical access. I have also done it for backend databases, ...
 

Also Known As

ARCON ARCOS, ARCON PAM
CA PAM, Xceedium Xsuite, CA Privileged Access Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RAK Bank, AXIS Bank, Reliance Capital, Kotak Life Insurance, MTS
NEOVERA, Telesis, eSoft
Find out what your peers are saying about ARCON Privileged Access Management vs. Symantec Privileged Access Manager and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.