We compared Cisco Identity Services Engine and Fortinet FortiNA (ISE)C based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Cisco ISE seems to be the slightly superior solution because of its expansive integration capabilities.
"The interface is pretty easy to use."
"The best features are the scalability and the license structure."
"We have seen ROI. It has done its job. It has protected us when we needed it to."
"The most valuable feature is the provisioning of the device so as to ensure that they are compliant with the security policy that we need to have."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the policy sets."
"The profiling model included is the most valuable feature."
"Using this solution gives us the ability to allow proper access to the network."
"Profiling is one of the most valuable features. We have a lot of different devices between cameras, access points, and laptops that get plugged in."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiNAC are access control, automation, artificial intelligence, analysis, and security, and it is a unified solution. You can combine a lot of features within the solution."
"Compared to other NAC vendors, Fortinet’s user interface is more user-friendly."
"Fortinet FortiNAC is a stable solution."
"The solution is good at giving a deep dive into each product. It tells you, for example, what is connected to the network. It gives us good reporting tools."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiNAC are user device management and there are plenty of policies."
"Fortinet FortiNAC is both scalable and stable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is having visibility over the IoT devices on the network."
"With FortiNAC, we don't need to configure the mass client site or access points. For example, we don't need to configure the switching site for a client's site. With Persistent Agent, it makes it much easier."
"It should be virtualized because many people have begun migrating to the cloud. They should offer a hybrid version."
"Cisco could improve the GUIs on their hardware."
"The user interface can be improved."
"Adding new devices was a little cumbersome. I haven't done it that many times, but I remember that adding new devices to the authentication piece of it was a little cumbersome. The way I was shown to do it, I thought it was odd because we had to go into the active device, copy the file down, export it, make some changes to it, and then reimport it as opposed to being able to click it and having a template to fill out."
"The solution could be more secure."
"The UI is not as intuitive as some other products, even products inside of Cisco's wheelhouse."
"Cisco ISE integration with Cisco ACI is something that can be done in a less complex way. And the simplification in that area may help us do better."
"The pricing is fair."
"The GUI in Fortinet FortiNAC could improve."
"The deployment of Fortinet FortiNAC could be better. When we are deploying the solution we have some level of dependencies with other vendors for their connection to Fortinet FortiNAC. Without these dependencies, it would be better."
"The implementation process needs improvement. Right now, it's somewhat complicated. They could create some templates to facilitate implementation. Right now everything is done manually, and it just takes a really long time at the initial setup."
"The automation in Fortinet FortiNAC could improve."
"Integration is hard in Fortinet FortiNAC, but they are evolving and getting better. For example, with Cisco, Aruba, Huawei, and Extreme devices, Fortinet FortiNAC is working properly, but some other devices have problems."
"Fortinet's local support could be improved."
"The course content could be improved, it's not that simple to work through."
"The dashboard needs to improve."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 136 reviews while Fortinet FortiNAC is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 43 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiNAC is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiNAC writes "I like the solution's native integration with other devices from the same vendor". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security, whereas Fortinet FortiNAC is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, Fortinet FortiClient and Portnox CORE. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. Fortinet FortiNAC report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.