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

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) vs IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence 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

Cisco Identity Services Eng...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
142
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (1st), Cisco Security Portfolio (1st)
IBM Security Identity Gover...
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (13th), Identity Management (IM) (29th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) and IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is designed for Network Access Control (NAC) and holds a mindshare of 25.8%, down 31.3% compared to last year.
IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence, on the other hand, focuses on User Provisioning Software, holds 1.6% mindshare, down 2.0% since last year.
Network Access Control (NAC)
User Provisioning Software
 

Featured Reviews

SunilkumarNaganuri - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced device administration hindered by complex deployment and security limitations
Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases. This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation. Threat detection capabilities are very weak. Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.
Siraz Shaik - PeerSpot reviewer
Clear evaluation and life cycle management; service center could be more user friendly
Our primary use case is for publishing and our customer has somewhere between 3,000-4,000 users. We're partners with IBM and I work as a security consultant.  This solution has a very good dashboard and the documentation is also very good. Life cycle management and governance are also good…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The endpoint profiling feature is among the most valuable because it keeps me from having to manually maintain a MAC address bypass list to track endpoints. I can have ISE profile them for me and then put them in the right bucket."
"The most important feature for us is visibility in terms of user connections. It's the ability to see what devices are online for a particular user that helps a lot with our troubleshooting."
"TACACS and .1X security are the most valuable features. TACACS acts for user control, so no one can authenticate to our network devices, and .1X is to validate that unauthorized devices are plugged into our network."
"Cisco ISE now competes with any other product in the space because of its centralized and unified highly secure access control with ISE."
"The features that do work, work well, and we use it on a daily basis."
"The way the ISE works is you can get into defining. Let's say, in my case, I've got a Windows laptop and I've got an Apple product and those have unique identifiers, unique back addresses. It would say that this in my profile so I could get to those apps with either device, 24/seven. That's how granular the ISE or these NAC Solutions can get."
"One of the most important features is the authentication security for the individual connection to the network through their computer or laptop."
"The policy sets give us more granular groups for end-user access."
"Lifecycle management, governance and documentation."
"I would rate the price eight out of 10, with 10 as the best value for money."
 

Cons

"Since we have started, we struggled a lot to implement this solution into our network, and we opened a case a couple of times. Up until this point, nothing else needs to be improved with this product."
"There are always some things that I would request."
"The tracking mechanism in Cisco ISE is relatively costly, especially its vendor-specific protocol."
"I'm frustrated by the resource consumption and how many resources it needs to run. It takes a lot of RAM. It takes a lot of space and a lot of IO power. It's frustrating to do upgrades because it takes a long time."
"In order to make it a ten, it should be more user-friendly. You need somebody who is knowledgeable about it to use it. It's not easy to use. We have to rely heavily on technical support."
"I'd like to see the logging be a bit more robust in terms of what it has baked in. If I want to do any in-depth searching, I have to export all the logs to an external platform like Elastic or LogRhythm and then parse through them myself. It would be nice if I could find what I want, when I want it, on the platform itself."
"The web interface needs improvement. The new web interface that they have is not as easy to manage and we find it to be very slow."
"Troubleshooting and multi-ISE can be challenging with the solution."
"The solution is a bit pricey for some regions."
"Self service center is not always easy to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution’s pricing is okay."
"The price can be lower, especially for subscriptions. It should be a lot cheaper to have a wide range of customers. The price should be comparable to competitive products like Forescout or Fortinet FortiNAC. Forescout is cheaper for customers looking for a cloud solution."
"The recent changes in the licensing model have caused some issues with the team."
"The price for Cisco ISE itself is very low, however, Cisco professional services are quite expensive. Subscription amount is dependent on number of users."
"Its licensing could be improved. It used to be perpetual, but now they are moving away from that."
"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."
"I am not aware of the current price for Cisco ISE, but considering it is a Cisco product, it is likely to be quite high."
"Cisco ISE is not inexpensive, but the solution is well-built and worth the expense."
"I would rate the price eight out of 10, with 10 as the best value for money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
851,823 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is better - Aruba Clearpass or Cisco ISE?
Aruba ClearPass is a Network Access Control tool that gives secure network access to multiple device types. You can adapt the policies to VPN access, wired, or wireless access. You can securely ...
What are the main differences between Cisco ISE and Forescout Platform?
OK, so Cisco ISE uses 802.1X to secure switchports against unauthorized access. The drawback of this is that ISE cannot secure the port if a device does not support 802.1x. Cameras, badge readers, ...
How does Cisco ISE compare with Fortinet FortiNAC?
Cisco ISE uses AI endpoint analytics to identify new devices based on their behavior. It will also notify you if someone plugs in with a device that is not allowed and will block it. The user exper...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco ISE
IGI, IBM Security Identity Manager, ISIM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, BC Hydro, Beachbody, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Cisco IT, Derby City Council, Global Banking Customer, Gobierno de Castilla-La Mancha, Houston Methodist, Linz AG, London Hydro, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Molina Healthcare, MST Systems, New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Reykjavik University, Wildau University
E.ON Global Commodities
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: May 2025.
851,823 professionals have used our research since 2012.