We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The asset discovery feature is the solution's most valuable aspect. It's very easy to pull assets into the database of the solution manager."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"One of the valuable features is the absence of any local user in a unique system. All users are defined in the AD; communication is only between Unix and AD."
"It is straightforward. It is a good technology, and it is made to do one single thing."
"The privileged access management into sensitive systems is very valuable. That includes control from the endpoint all the way through to the managing of passwords and credentials that are used by the person to access the sensitive information. It's very useful, because nobody ever really maintains passwords for those endpoint systems. It's maintained in the Dropbox password file."
"Reduces major vulnerabilities by removing local administrator privileges."
"I find the solution’s features like section management, password management, and analytics valuable."
"Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"I love the ability to customize the passwords: the forbidden characters, the length of the password, the number of capital, lowercase, and special characters. You can customize the password so that it tailor fits, for example, mainframes that can't have more than eight characters. You can say, "I want a random password that doesn't have these special characters, but it is exactly eight characters," so that it doesn't throw errors."
"The fact that I can put my vault here in a central location on one net for example, and I'll have a CPM in California, a CPM in Texas, a CPM in New York, a CPM in Florida, and actually be able to grow with my company and not necessarily have to continue to grow my vault until I get to a certain number accounts - yet I can still manage everything across the country, if not the world - I love that. I love the flexibility and the capability of being able to pull those components out."
"This solution is quite stable."
"It is a single tool that isolates possible kinds of malware. You get lateral movement blocking and auditing information, e.g., you know who is doing what. You are getting protections from the service as well as a useful environment. All your admins can easily go in and out of your company while accessing your servers in a secure way, even if they are working abroad."
"It allows users to self-provision access to the accounts that they need."
"Automates password management to remove the human chain weakness."
"Its' quite stable."
"We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"There are three types of endpoints. If we need to use them in the solution, then we need to purchase the licenses separately. The tool needs to improve its licensing."
"The other area to improve is that they rely on MS SQL servers only. You cannot have any other database behind them. They have to be on MS SQL. If they can do something about these issues, this would be a better alternative for some customers."
"How the accounts are presented in the solution's UI can be improved."
"It only has limited support for Mac."
"There is room for improvement in having the solution align more with standards. We're always shoehorning the product into the standards. It's not that it doesn't work for standards, it does. But Quick Start Policies are pretty close to what we need. The vendor needs to keep looking at GDPR, 27001, and 27701. That's why our clients buy the product."
"They need to come up with better integrative options which should be customer-centric."
"Its feature for establishing workflows needs improvement."
"The weaknesses are related to the effort required to migrate from existing technologies or having no Privilege Access Management (PAM) at all to adopting technologies like BeyondTrust. It involves changes in processes and can take a significant amount of time, typically six to twelve months."
"Currently, in Secure Connect, an end user is required to enter account information manually, and cannot save any of this information for future use."
"What could be improved in CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the licensing model. It should be more flexible in terms of the users. Currently, it's based on the number of users, but many users only log in once in four months or once in five months. It would be great if the licensing model could be modified based on user needs. We even have users who have not logged in even once."
"The scalability, sometimes, is lacking. It works really well for more static environments... But for an environment where you're constantly spinning up new infrastructure or new endpoints, sometimes it has a hard time keeping up."
"We had an issue with the Copy feature... Apparently, in version 10, that Copy feature does not work. You actually have to click Show and then copy the password from within Show and then paste it. We've had a million tickets and we had to figure out a workaround to it."
"I'm not a fan of technical support with CyberArk. It's like jumping through red tape and hoops. Quite frankly, it's almost like when you call CyberArk you get the Help Desk or the level-one. I'm a level-one. I got the CCD, I know how to do the initial troubleshooting. When I call CyberArk it's because I can't figure the problem out. So I need a level-two, three, four. I don't need you to tell me, "Hey, open a ticket and then give me logs.""
"There were a lot of manual steps in the initial setup which could have been automated. I read the 10.4 release that was sent out about a month or two ago, and I saw the steps required for upgrade have been reduced by about 90%. That was a big thing for me, but I still haven't seen that yet because we have not upgrade past 9.9.5."
"CyberArk PAM could greatly benefit from an under-the-hood update; integrating machine learning algorithms could provide predictive insights."
"We would like to expand the usage of the auto discovery accounts feed, then on our end, tie in the REST API for automation."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 5th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 142 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Delinea Secret Server, ARCON Privileged Access Management and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard. See our BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management vs. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager report.
See our list of best Privileged Access Management (PAM) vendors.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
