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

Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS) vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 20, 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

Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS)
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (6th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS) is 3.2%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.4%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.4%
Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS)3.2%
Other94.4%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Le Ban - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Security Manager & Chief IT Engineer at JVPC
Affordable product with an easy initial setup process
Ivanti NAC's most valuable feature is reasonable pricing The product's performance needs improvement. We are doing the PoC of Ivanti NAC. I rate the platform's stability an eight out of ten. I rate Ivanti NAC's scalability an eight out of ten. We have 150 users for it. I contacted the…
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Integration with other vendors is possible."
"Ivanti NAC's most valuable feature is reasonable pricing."
"The profiler option allows me to see every detail in a systematic manner from a switch. I can choose the switch and I can see the port NAC address and time."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has absolutely saved us money, and I sleep better at night because of it, as we have the MDR package as well and just knowing someone is watching those endpoints at 3:00 a.m. is a lifesaver that you cannot put a dollar figure on."
"By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, our company has been able to eliminate or consolidate security tools, such as BeyondTrust PAM, and we removed USB-Lock software by adopting ThreatLocker."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted our organization by making our processes so fast, our operations super efficient, and more reliable now."
"What sets ThreatLocker apart from competitors offering similar solutions is ringfencing. The ringfencing controls, along with the application elevation features, keep it out of the user's line of sight while still protecting them."
"The customer service and technical support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are phenomenal, top-notch and top drawer, always willing to help and showing exactly where we need to look to ensure we can have the tools we need for the next time, reducing the need to call into support."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped reduce the incidents of clients getting exploits or ransomware put on their devices by 110 times."
 

Cons

"At some point, the server got cached and we faced several issues that impacted our customers. We would like to have this resolved."
"The documentation needs to be improved. There are a lot of details that are missed which makes it confusing."
"The product's performance needs improvement."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"It is a little frustrating on my end since I like to go as quickly as I possibly can, and it slows me down."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has reduced some of the operational costs in my company in terms of time spent on tickets, but nothing major."
"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."
"ThreatLocker University offers many good training modules, but more in-depth training for advanced platforms would be beneficial."
"I have encountered some problems with stability, however, they are resolved quickly."
"Identifying areas of improvement is challenging, however, perhaps adding a few more built-ins could help."
"From a reporting perspective, enhancing the ability to customize reports would be beneficial."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is cost-effective."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business59
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, you have a lot of information or a lot of alerts. However, the moment you zoom i...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for identifying the most critical and sensitive information of the o...
 

Also Known As

Pulse Policy Secure
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Entegrus
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Ivanti Policy Secure (IPS) vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.