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

Aruba VPN vs Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 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

Aruba VPN
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
33rd
Average Rating
5.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cisco Secure Client (includ...
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
SSL VPN (3rd), ZTNA as a Service (13th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Enterprise Infrastructure VPN category, the mindshare of Aruba VPN is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is 5.5%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect)5.5%
Aruba VPN0.8%
Other93.7%
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
 

Featured Reviews

Zoltán Nagy - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Infrastructure Manager at Provident Pénzügyi Zrt.
The appliance would crash because of the large number of connections, but its stability was fine
We purchased a relatively small Aruba VPN appliance. Unfortunately, it was not a well-designed VPN appliance product. I think the vendor did not provide us with the best solution. At that time, the world and our company faced the first COVID lockdown, and everybody had to work from home. During this time, the small VPN appliance was overwhelmed by the number of connections, and we experienced many issues. Firstly, it turned out that the firmware was buggy. When around 100 to 300 users tried to connect at the beginning of the day, the appliance would crash, and the users would not be able to connect. We had to escalate the issue to the manufacturer, and they had to release new firmware to resolve the problem, which took around one week. As you can imagine, during the COVID-19 pandemic, everyone had to work from home, and we were struggling to connect to the VPN because of the firmware bug. It took Aruba at least one week to resolve the issue. Another major pain point we faced was with the VPN client. At the time, we were using the Windows 7 operating system on the client machines. Unfortunately, we could not identify the precise circumstances in which the Aruba VPN client could not establish a connection. This was very, very disappointing for us and caused a lot of problems for our department. We had around 500 to 600 users who wanted to connect, and at least 50 to 60 users, or about 10% of the users, were unable to connect each day due to this anomaly. We were not able to identify the root cause of the problem. We collected and provided all the logs that the local support partner requested. Unfortunately, neither the Hungarian local support partner nor the Aruba headquarters could identify the root cause of how and why the Aruba VPN client could not establish a connection. So, it felt like a bad spot. Each day, users were praying to connect over the VPN and to be able to work that day. Aruba VPN sometimes worked, and sometimes it didn't. We were very disappointed and had to switch to a different supplier as soon as possible. We switched to a Cisco product and were very satisfied with the Cisco VPN.
AS
Manager - Projects at airtel
Offers work-from-anywhere flexibility but navigates occasional proxy confusion
The analytics I downloaded from your site as a free download did not carry the information that was actually required. I was looking at the market segmentation and market share, along with some USPs which differentiated them from each other. The free download had two issues: many things were repetitive, and it was designed to not release any relevant information. Only headers were present, so I was not able to determine whether the final report would be worthwhile. I have not worked with enterprise tools that I could share feedback on for website publication. I see benefits from using Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect). However, I would not recommend it because future adoptions will be towards Zscaler, as SSC is a better model than VPN. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 7.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Aruba VPN is lighter on machines, and users don't feel any difference in having these items installed on their PCs or laptops."
"What I like the most about Aruba VPN is that it's great for companies with diverse network needs."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Aruba VPN’s stability was okay."
"The solution is quite stable."
"This solution is stable. There have been no technical issues."
"Every time I have to connect to the network I use this solution; it is a customizable solution, it makes life easier for me, and it makes the global workforce work much easier and more secure."
"The solution certainly simplifies processes for a remote workforce by ensuring secure and efficient connectivity."
"The most valuable features of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is the reliability and scalability."
"I think Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is stable."
"My advice to those considering the product is to just do it because the solution is very good, very scalable, and very easy to maintain."
"Support does solve our issues."
 

Cons

"It should address issues that are vital to maintaining the company's reputation."
"When around 100 to 300 users tried to connect at the beginning of the day, the appliance would crash, and the users would not be able to connect."
"There is room for improvement from the solution's security point of view."
"They could release product updates more frequently."
"I think, in general, most of the applications are slow, but this is everyday stuff. I think this is more related to the link speed — the links, the lossage, etc."
"The only problem is that if you want to download it somewhere else, you cannot; you cannot download it unless you have a valid Cisco account."
"The price could be reduced."
"The support could be more proactive in their recommendations. I noticed that the Cisco support agents tend to leave customers to do what they need to do in many ways, and you can choose how you want to do it. However, it would be great if they could proactively be involved in best practices and let other customers know how most people are doing it."
"This solution doesn't address the seal of trust as a concept for a traditional VPN clients. I think that it is a dying product."
"The various licensing options make it challenging to manage, and the cost is a significant issue for customers."
"With Zero Trust Network, I have reviewed Palo Alto and Cisco, and I must admit that Cisco's products are lacking."
"The solution's performance and stability are average."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Customers need to buy a VPN client license."
"We do not have to purchase a separate license for Aruba VPN; it is included in the ClearPass package."
"My company has a three-year or a four-year license. In scenarios attached to a solution where the product may be reaching an end-of-support or end-of-life phase, Cisco provides OS support in such environments."
"It is not a free solution and the user needs to buy license."
"It costs around 80,000 Indian rupees for a hundred licenses, so approximately $1,020 USD."
"We pay for an annual subscription. Additionally to the subscription, we thought in order to connect this solution to the Active Directory we had to purchase a Cisco ACS, Access Control System. It turns out we did not actually need it."
"The solution is based on an annual licensing model and is expensive."
"The licensing costs are reasonable."
"I would rate the pricing for the license of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client around four to five out of ten. It's not the cheapest option, but it's also not overly expensive."
"The initial cost is the ASA and other items, but after that, it is relatively inexpensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise49
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is somewhat expensive compared to others such as Fortinet or Palo Alto, which provide free VPN when the firewall is purchased. Palo Alto and Fortinet prov...
What needs improvement with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
There are no features that I wish Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) had that it does not currently provide. If I could change one thing about it, I would have no changes to suggest.
What is your primary use case for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
I primarily use Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) for VPN connections and network-related activities. We have Cisco APIs and Cisco VPN that serve as the foundation for our operations. As a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
MST, Molina Healthcare, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, Arup, New South Wales Rural FireService
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba VPN vs. Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.