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

Citrix Secure Private Access vs Portnox comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Citrix Secure Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Portnox
Ranking in ZTNA
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (6th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Citrix Secure Private Access is 3.9%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 3.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Portnox3.0%
Citrix Secure Private Access3.9%
Other93.1%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Enterprise Architect at Wipro Limited
Zero trust architecture strengthens security with seamless login experiences and reliable global access
The solution requires proper configuration and policy enforcement to avoid excessive access restrictions. Some applications may need additional integration efforts for seamless access, and I may face restrictions if device posture fails compliance checks. The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons. Initial setup and policy tuning can be complex, especially in large environments.
reviewer9216065 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Cloud Security Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Centralized access control has simplified operations but still needs more flexible on‑prem options
Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability. If you are in a highly regulated industry with mandates requiring the solution to be completely on-premises, Portnox does not work at all. I do not think they position their products for those industries. Even for non-heavily regulated industries, if you want a self-sufficient system within your own premises, there are design constraints because at some point you must reach out to Portnox infrastructure in the cloud, and if that is unavailable, it suffers. For example, on deep-sea oil rigs without proper connectivity, it struggles. I am not sure they want to enter that particular business segment, as it may not align with their value proposition. I cannot blindly select this product and deploy it everywhere; I must make deliberate decisions first. Portnox could improve by reducing its heavy reliance on the cloud. While I do not think they want to eliminate this aspect, a complete solution for regulated entities would include some on-premises setup that is self-sufficient and does not depend on the cloud. This is the most important improvement. Second, Portnox already has a robust integration ecosystem with many vendors, but not all. Even when integration exists, the extent varies, particularly regarding vendor-specific attributes. I have never faced challenges because my security tools and stack have been standard: Cisco, Aruba access points, Cisco switches, and UniFi, all of which work well with them. However, there is room for deeper integration when compared to tools like Cisco ISE and Aruba ClearPass. Their offerings are clear, easy to onboard, and their day zero and day one onboarding activities are streamlined and straightforward. They share best practice checklists that make configuration simple.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Citrix Secure Private Access is its Zero Trust architecture, which enhances security by granting access based on identity and device posture."
"It is easy and simple, and it has got an easy interface. It is not hard to learn. With just three clicks, you log in, and you're there."
"Virtual desktops and virtual apps are most valuable."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"There is an add-on feature for application control to kill unwanted applications when launched on a user's device."
"Portnox's pricing is very conservative and offers great value for money."
"The cloud-based feature of Portnox is excellent."
"The minute people have issues on their network, we can see what is happening right away."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"One of the features I enjoyed the most about Portnox was the ability to dive in with proper details on an endpoint."
 

Cons

"INGPU for engineering software is an area of improvement."
"When we go to print, we have to go through secure print. The secure printing kind of takes a while. It is a little latent."
"The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons."
"One of the things for the on-premise is that sometimes you click on it and it takes a while for it to respond."
"Portnox CORE can improve on support for unmanaged switches (or hubs) and other brands of network devices. These kinds of devices are still in use in organisations, especially SMEs who cannot afford to buy a managed switch."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"The Wi-Fi integration could be done better from their end."
"The price could be better."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"The support team is very limited. They don't have much support during Asia Pacific hours; the team sits in during the EMI and US hours."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. They should provide better licensing options."
"Pricing is not cheap. It is based on licenses per port. After licensing is purchased, you only pay for support."
"The licensing module should be reviewed to count the number of devices instead of port numbers of total switches. There is a case for this where not all ports for a switch are used by devices. Unused ports are calculated in the license, then the customer pays for license for those unused ports."
"It is not bad. It is a bit on the high side, but considering the cloud features and how much it costs to run the instance in the cloud, it is not unreasonable. We do have RADIUS servers for the US, Asia, and Europe."
"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Performing Arts
10%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
The solution requires proper configuration and policy enforcement to avoid excessive access restrictions. Some applications may need additional integration efforts for seamless access, and I may fa...
What is your primary use case for Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I primarily use Citrix Secure Private Access ( /products/citrix-secure-private-access-reviews ) for Zero Trust Network Access ( /categories/ztna ), granting access based on user identity, device se...
What advice do you have for others considering Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I rate Citrix Secure Private Access overall at eight. Although Citrix licensing can help customers save costs where Citrix environments are present, improvements are necessary given the competition...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox Clear?
Portnox's pricing is very conservative and offers great value for money. If I compare it with any other solution, pricing is definitely at the top of the list because it is very affordable. Pricing...
What needs improvement with Portnox Clear?
Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability. If you are in a highly regulated industry with mandates requiring the solution to be completely on-premises, Portnox does not work at...
What is your primary use case for Portnox Clear?
I have predominantly used Portnox as a NAC solution for centralized, cloud-managed access control across our globally distributed data centers and offices, with more emphasis on offices than data c...
 

Also Known As

Citrix Secure Workspace Access, Citrix Access Control, Citrix Secure Internet Access
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Messenger
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Secure Private Access vs. Portnox and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.