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) (28th)
 

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 26.3%, down 31.4% compared to last year.
IBM Security Identity Governance and Intelligence, on the other hand, focuses on User Provisioning Software, holds 1.7% mindshare, down 2.1% 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

"It integrates with the rest of our platform, like our firewall, and helps us a lot. It also does a good job establishing trust for every access request."
"The interface is pretty easy to use."
"It's flexible and stable. It's been good as a standard environment to run."
"It has allowed us to pull in multiple authentication databases, then centralize them into a captive portal system."
"It's easy to change and add policies."
"The way we can trust this solution is the most valuable. We have no issue with this product. It is a competitive product. You need to have a very good and deep knowledge of the product to take the full benefits of all the features, but it is a good product."
"It works as a good RADIUS server. It has lots of features. It works with all the proprietary Cisco AB pairs and features."
"I found the CMDB Direct Connect in Cisco ISE 3.2 the most promising feature for my use case."
"I would rate the price eight out of 10, with 10 as the best value for money."
"Lifecycle management, governance and documentation."
 

Cons

"When I work with customers to do my knowledge transfer, they're really overwhelmed with the navigation of the product and the number of things you can do with it. From a user interface standpoint, Cisco could focus on making certain tasks a bit more guided and easier for customers to walk through. That is, a user-friendly interface and streamlined workflows would be great."
"The upgrades could be better. Every time we try to do an upgrade, we have problems. It's a pain."
"If I was going to improve anything, it would be the ease of migration. It's really difficult at the moment if you're looking to upgrade ISE 2.1 and you want to go to ISE 3.1 or 3.2, that whole upgrade path and, particularly, the licensing is quite a minefield to sort out."
"The initial setup process is complex since there are so many big components."
"We face many bugs."
"It would be ideal if Cisco could provide some short training videos or documentation to customers to help them understand how to use the product."
"The solution lacks properly knowledgeable support, especially internationally, and this is why I am exploring other applications."
"I don't like the fact that we can see the logs only for 24 hours. Maybe that happens because of the way we set it up."
"Self service center is not always easy to understand."
"The solution is a bit pricey for some regions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"ISE has always been expensive compared to other products in terms of what it does on a user level."
"The price is a bit on the high side."
"Standard licensing gives backup access and very few features, and then there's VM licensing - each VM we use needs to be licensed."
"If you're not going through an agreement, it's very expensive."
"It's an expensive solution when compared to other vendors."
"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."
"If you consider money only, Cisco ISE is not a cheap solution."
"The licensing is subscription-based and based on the user account."
"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.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
26%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.