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

Impulse Point SafeConnect vs Portnox comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Impulse Point SafeConnect
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
ZTNA (7th), Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Impulse Point SafeConnect is 1.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 6.4%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Portnox6.4%
Impulse Point SafeConnect1.6%
Other92.0%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

CD
Director of Computer Information Services at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy to scale, enforces policies well, and has responsive technical support
A lot of campuses use SafeConnect. It gives us good visibility and enforces policies. It helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access. Technical support is responsive. The stability is pretty good. It is very easy to scale the product.
Maurice Mwaura - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Manager at Applied Principles Limited
Unified access control has improved compliance visibility and simplified passwordless access
There is work to be done when it comes to making the solution more seamless. For example, when a user is denied access, they would need a way to maybe self-resolve themselves, perhaps a way to generate a ticket on their own, something around resolutions. When it comes to users using the product, that is where good products are differentiated from products that are a bit of a challenge. Portnox has much to do in terms of their reporting. The generated reports need improvement. Things that other tools would say are normal are usually not present. For example, there is a page called NAS devices or NAS network that is able to show the switches that have been managed. Currently, there is no way of generating an easy report or an easy way of just generating something to tell the customer what they have been able to achieve so far. This is not done yet and is still very manual. I think there is work to be done there. More integrations around the various products being used would be beneficial. So far I have not encountered any major challenge. Where there was a challenge, I think support came in and helped us resolve. In fact, most of the challenges are not with the product; they are with the customer environment. I think that is just to update their documentation where they have come across a new vendor for easier integrations in the future.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It gives us good visibility and enforces policies, helps enforce network security by scanning devices, making sure they have current and valid antivirus solutions with up-to-date antivirus definitions, and steers our end users by enforcing policy groups and steering them to the right access."
"It is very easy to scale the product."
"Technical support was very helpful when we needed them."
"It's so easy to set up, you don't need outside assistance."
"Portnox saves me about fifty percent of my time."
"It's easy to manage and troubleshoot thanks to the lightweight components."
"The simplicity of the product is commendable."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"We are very satisfied with this solution; we like it because it is agentless."
"It's a stable product."
 

Cons

"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
"The solution would be much better if it offered self-service onboarding."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"The integration between Portnox CORE and Portnox CLEAR can be better. These are two different systems, and there is no unique console for both devices."
"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."
"The solution did have some stability issues, however, all I had to do was restart it."
"Now, the way security is viewed, maybe including something like AI, to automate some of the things that are required to be done would be great."
"I believe there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of integration."
"Their filtering system tends to lag quite a bit, so when I'm doing filtering at times, it doesn't filter the items properly."
"The licensing is based on a per-port price, even when you are not using all of the ports, and this is something that could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For our tier group, for one year, the cost is probably around $10,000 for the license. If you do multi-year, you could get two years, and you could get it for about $8,000 per year. If you do three years, you get it around $7,000 a year."
"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."
"We pay for port licensing and support on a yearly basis, and it's not cheap."
"The tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
"The pricing is a bit high, possibly due to the cloud features and running instances across regions like the US, Asia, and Europe."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The solution is very expensive and I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"The vendor price is fair."
"It's not cheap. It's not expensive. It's in the middle."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Portnox Clear?
Regarding hidden maintenance costs, I would say I have never encountered a challenge where Portnox was not able to work or where I told the customer to do any major infrastructural changes. Even be...
What needs improvement with Portnox Clear?
I used to have difficulty sometimes with VPN in Portnox, but in general, I am not sure about areas for improvement. I did not try the mobile application, and the documentation is important because ...
What is your primary use case for Portnox Clear?
From customer to customer, the use case for Portnox is different. Some customers ask for a network to protect their board and local network, while others want to allow employees to access via VPN a...
 

Also Known As

SafeConnect
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aerohive Solution
Data Realty, Royal London, Wales Millennium Centre, McLaren Construction Group, EL AL Israeli Airlines, 
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: May 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.