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

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (3rd), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), ZTNA as a Service (11th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (9th)
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Man...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (8th), SSL VPN (5th), Remote Access (11th), Access Management (10th)
Netskope Next Gen Secure We...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
13th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is 1.1%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is 2.2%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Ashish Kumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers remote access control, good GUI and easy to configure
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.
Manish Dave - PeerSpot reviewer
Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations
There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. If I compare it with other products, the groups and are a little different in Netgroup. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow. So initially, when doing a pilot, at that time, it takes a lot of time to streamline the policies. So that is one thing they can work on. It should be easy to edit and easy to deploy. The only thing is now, as part of the NexGen SWG, in the same IPU currently, the KATB and UBA portion is very limited. So maybe Netskope can extend it in future releases. That is point number one. Point number two, integration with any DLP solution should be very seamless, irrespective of the brand or make of the DLP. Netskope was also to come up with the endpoint DLP, which was expected in Q4 last year but which is still not out. So, that is the reason why we had to go with a separate DLP. If everything were available in one SKU, we would not have to search outside for the business solution. So maybe Netskope can work on all four mediums of DLP, which are the endpoint, the network, email, and the web. All four mediums should be covered as part of the DLP solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"The tool is reliable and easy to configure."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"F5 BIG-IP APM is relatively easy to use."
"Stickiness is the most valuable feature of the product."
"The portal access was very good."
"I rate the overall solution nine out of ten."
"On a scale from one to ten for stability, I would rate F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) a ten."
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its three modules, which are SWG, ZTNA, and CASB."
"The solution offers good security functionality."
"The solution has some useful features, such as microservices. They have sandboxing that allows the prevention, encryption, and remote browser isolation."
"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."
"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."
"Web filtering and DLP are good features."
"Overall, the product is nice, and I like the URL filtering, CASB, and other security stacks like threat prevention."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is that everything is on the cloud. It has no on-premise hardware to deal with."
 

Cons

"Our iboss subscription access should be more secure with an OTP or VPN etc. It is easy to gain access if, for example, hackers obtain my username and password."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"Its pricing could be better."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers. This type of encryption is tough for any appliance in a BYOD environment."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
"If I could copy and paste objects instead of picking and configuring them from scratch each time, it would be great."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"I have had a lot of issues in the past few months with the agents, which was disappointing."
"The main improvement needed for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is to integrate into the cloud-delivered services from F5."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"F5 BIG-IP APM disconnects when you leave it for long enough, but that is natural for IT solutions to do. That's a little bit frustrating."
"The stability of the solution to be very good. It is not the best and could improve but it is better than other solutions, such as Forcepoint."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"The solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."
"The solution needs to improve its on-premise detection technique."
"Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices."
"The initial setup is a bit complex in that it takes a lot of time. In order to get the product to work as you need it to, there is a lot of configuration required."
"The solution could improve the features for Zero Trust Network Access. They should add more security components to that module."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"The tool is a little bit expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Recently, they have simplified the licensing"
"The product is very expensive."
"The price is average. Because the license is user-based, you can increase it as per the user quantity."
"The solution's overall cost is cheaper than regular web security solutions."
"The product is cheap."
"We pay a licensing fee of $10,000 on a yearly basis."
"The license model is based on the number of users. You have the possibility to have 10,000 users if you wish."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?
Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.
What needs improvement with iboss?
I have a couple of thoughts for improvement, but usually when I address them with my rep, they put it into the featur...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We use it primarily for simpler filtering because we're a K12 entity.
What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 products are more expensive than other solutions but are valued for their quality and reliability, akin to purchas...
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM ( /categories/application-performance-monitoring-apm-and-observability )) does n...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Netscope, Zscaler if they continue route they are on now. FIrewalls needs great deal of automation on each end, datac...
Which lesser known firewall product has the best chance at unseating the market leaders?
Those firewalls that allow extend the perimeter. Nowadays, there is a issue with the static perimeter and all is goin...
What do you like most about Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway?
There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are alread...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
F5 Access Policy Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
City Bank, Ricacorp Properties, Miele, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office
Arrow, Cloudrise, Sainsbury, Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy, CSA, AVX Corporation Nuna, City of San Diego Case, Genomic Health Case Study, Oak Hill Advisors, MaRS Discovery District.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.