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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 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

Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (53rd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (13th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (41st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is 3.4%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is 2.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS)3.4%
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 3602.1%
Other94.5%
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer373227 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Marketing strengths shine but regaining user trust needs significant effort
There are numerous things that could be improved about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) to get it back on track. Sollution for small branches: when we have to connect a lot very small branches (or sometimes only an ATM) we need something small, with LTE and with reasonable price. Cisco response is SDWAN but it is not always the case. Recently Cisco released some small firewalls but I have not tried them yet. Central management with FMC is a very good idea, but sometimes local management or monitoring is helpfull. With Cisco You have to decide: central or local. You cannot have both. Regarding usability, when you commit configuration on Cisco, it sometimes takes very long. Commits also take some time for the competition, but Cisco is definitely lagging behind the rest in this respect. Last but not least, for me as a professional is lack of CLI. With CLI, I can configure every firewall on the market except Cisco. CLI is very important in professional working, and IMHO it was an unwise decision by Cisco to remove it. Graphical interfaces are very nice, but when you've got thousands of objects in a big installation and have to configure many things, CLI is a much faster way to do it.
reviewer2857197 - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead IT Service Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Cloud-native threat detection has improved incident investigations and now reduces breach risk
We have covered most of the features over the past three years and look forward to discovering more as we work closely with the ExtraHop technical team, who are open to sharing what they have developed. Pricing is on the higher side, typically based on load, volume of traffic, and deployment scale. The advanced detection capabilities provide significant value in reducing investigation time, making the licensing and pricing acceptable for larger organizations. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 has undeniably improved our security posture, reduced manual investigation efforts, and facilitated fast threat detection mechanisms, which all help prevent costly potential breaches in enterprise environments. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360's SaaS environment is well-suited for cloud, on-premises, and hybrid environments, effectively addressing real-life scenarios involving east-west and north-south traffic. The platform is recommended for large organizations in need of comprehensive detection capabilities. I would rate this product overall as an 8 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has good intelligence. It does a great job at stopping threats."
"Ir's signature-based. We are also using the anomaly baseline formation, where it links the network, then anything that goes away from the norm is also flagged. Those are the two most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the support."
"The solution is stable and reliable, it does the job well."
"The most valuable features are the intrusion detection ones."
"Among all the different solutions I have worked with, such as Palo Alto many other firewalls, Cisco has the support, documentation, and design, and the documentation is widely available and it can help you a lot with implementation, making the implementation much easier."
"The tracking intelligence feature is very good. This solution provides us with the opportunity to detect threats in real-time."
"Cisco NGIPS is a stable solution."
"It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for network security and management."
"ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 has positively impacted my organization by helping us detect abnormal activity on our network that we could not detect through our SIEM or XDR platform."
"It is scalable."
"It is very easy to collect and handle data in ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud. Integration with Big Data is also easy. Many of our customers integrate it with Big Data platforms like Splunk or Elastic. It is also easy to handle and easy to understand."
"Their technical support is more effective and of better quality than other competitors."
"ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 has undeniably improved our security posture, reduced manual investigation efforts, and facilitated fast threat detection mechanisms, which all help prevent costly potential breaches in enterprise environments."
 

Cons

"The integration can be more secure."
"Currently, this product is difficult to manage. It needs to be more user-friendly."
"The time it takes for the product to mature, the maturity journey, the product maturity cycle, takes too long."
"The price of the solution is expensive to a degree it cannot be used by small businesses."
"The GUI could be improved. The pain point is really only focused toward the security engineer who configures it and the operation engineer who manages it."
"The price of Cisco NGIPS could improve."
"While the Management GUI and FMC could be improved, the devices themselves function well."
"Rating the technical support from one to five (where five is high), I would rate them as a two. I find them to be very bad."
"One challenge with ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is its pricing, which tends to be comparatively high in the marketplace."
"A drawback includes bucket storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations."
"There needs to be more support."
"They can include integration with SAP. Currently, no vendor provides network performance monitoring in the SAP market. It is a very big market. We have around 400 customers for SAP in Korea. In the USA, there are more than 10,000 customers."
"Their professional service can be improved."
"I would like to see ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 improved by integrating XDR features with NDR."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing four out of 10."
"They are very expensive in some places and not reasonable at times for many customers. I have had customers choose another solution because of the high price."
"The weakness of Cisco Firepower is the cost. Some of the customers see it as very expensive."
"The solution is pricey, but worth it."
"Cisco products are always expensive, but if you can afford the price then it's a great solution."
"The price of Cisco NGIPS could be reduced. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"There is a license required to use Cisco NGIPS and it can be a one or three-year license."
"It is expensive. It has separate licensing for all the features, and every feature set seems to require another license. Licensing is on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs besides the standard licensing fee."
"When compared to other solutions, it aligns with the market average, indicating a competitive pricing level."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
902,417 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise27
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco NGIPS?
I would rate the price for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) as high.
What needs improvement with Cisco NGIPS?
I am aware that we are not measuring some metrics or tracking access through Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS). In my opinion, Cisco could improve the Web GUI for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS).
What is your primary use case for Cisco NGIPS?
Our main use case for Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) is in-line traffic control, and we are using IPS in an in-line mode.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sourcefire NGIPS, Firepower NGIPS
ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud, Reveal(X) Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

American Electric Power, Huntington Bank, Keycorp, Nationwide, Transunion, Marriott, Inova Health, Ford, Thomson Reuters, Dow Chemical, Equifax, Chevron, Walmart, Coca Cola
Wizards of the Coast
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure IPS (NGIPS) vs. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,417 professionals have used our research since 2012.