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

NordLayer 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

NordLayer
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
20th
Ranking in ZTNA
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (39th), Internet Security (18th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (29th), ZTNA as a Service (25th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (34th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (25th)
Portnox
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
6th
Ranking in ZTNA
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Passwordless Authentication (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of NordLayer is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Portnox is 5.5%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Portnox5.5%
NordLayer0.5%
Other94.0%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Christophe Derdeyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner delaware Singapore at delaware Singapore
A convenient and easy tool with an incredibly high number of dialing points
The solution is convenient and easy. It has an incredibly high number of dialing points for pretty much every single country in the world. It has a few additional security features. It has a function that prevents unsecured access if my connection were to drop for any reason. It’s something I like. It has threat protection features. It can protect my web connection and files against malicious downloads and trackers.
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 solution is convenient and easy."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice. We use Meraki for our switching, and it is simple to point all of our networks and offices to Portnox. It is pretty seamless."
"The most important feature is that this solution is agentless. So, you don't have to install any agents on endpoints."
"Portnox helped to free up staff time and resources for other IT security priorities and IT work."
"The cloud-based feature is very nice."
"Portnox's pricing is very conservative and offers great value for money."
"It's agentless, and it's scalable."
"The Vidahost feature is currently in action, and it appears to be providing valuable data insights."
"With Portnox, you have a large-scale view of the systems on your estate, and you can use the ID of that user to search and get substantial information about a user."
 

Cons

"The tool is not perfectly stable."
"Portnox has design considerations that limit its applicability."
"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."
"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."
"From a resource perspective, the OEM can do better in terms of resource utilization."
"It would be good to integrate Portnox CORE with CLEAR."
"We have been having some issues with it. That's why we're considering migrating to Portnox Clear due to some limitations with CORE."
"Portnox can occasionally knock out a switch port, causing network downtime and requiring manual reset."
"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

Information not available
"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."
"The cost of Portnox Clear is reasonable."
"The tool is more expensive than Fortinet."
"Pricing is quite reasonable."
"The vendor price is fair."
"The users are not very happy with the new licensing option where there is only a subscription license. There is no perpetual license."
"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.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Legal Firm
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
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

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

No data available
Access Layers Portnox, Portnox CLEAR
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hostinger, Shutterstock, USMobile, Soundcloud, Calendly, whatagraph.
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: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.