We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Rather than multiple tools for maintaining regulatory compliance around passwords and privileged accounts, we have centralized as much as possible with CyberArk. This is now a one stop shop for end users to access their elevated credentials."
"The product has allowed us to improve both the management and access to privileged credentials, while also creating a full audit trail of all activities happening within isolated sessions of all tasks and activities taking place within the solution."
"I really like the PTA (Privileged Threat Analytics). I find this the best feature."
"Creating policies and the password rotation feature have been valuable. We don't have to memorize our password for the ADM account."
"Technical support has been very responsive in navigating challenges. It is very easy to open a ticket."
"The automatic change of the password and Privileged Session Manager (PSM) are the most valuable features. With Privileged Session Manager, you can control the password management in a centralized way. You can activate these features in a session; the session isolation and recording. You apply the full intermediation principle. So, you must pass through CyberArk PAM to get access to the target system. You don't need to know the password, and everything that you do is registered and auditable. In this case, no one gets to touch the password directly. Also, you can implement detection and response behavior in case of a breach."
"For a while, there were individual IDs having privileged access. We wanted to restrict that. We implemented the solution so that it can be more of internal control. We can have session recordings happening and reduce our attacks."
"All of the features of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager are valuable."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"This is a product that is easy to install and integrate, and it is simple to use."
"The portal access was very good."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work."
"Stickiness is the most valuable feature of the product."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"Many of the infrastructure folks who use the product dislike it because it complicates their workflow. They get a little less control, and they have to go through a specific solution. It proactively logs in for them, which obfuscates some of the issues that they may be troubleshooting."
"The initial setup was a bit complex."
"It needs better documentation with more examples for the configuration files and API/REST integration"
"One thing that could be improved is to create of a better alternative for fixing group policy fees. We currently use Microsoft, but they have introduced new policies that may not be compatible."
"CyberArk has to continue to evolve with that threat landscape to make sure that they're still protecting those credentials that are owned by those that have privileged accounts in the firms."
"PAM could be more user-friendly and CyberArk could update the documentation to include more real-world examples. You have to learn it yourself through trial and error. In particular, the online documentation should have more information about troubleshooting."
"They can do a better job in the PSM space."
"It's a big program. To scale excessively, locally, on an on-prem application, takes a lot of servers."
"F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager has room for improvement in integration with other products."
"The price of this product can be improved."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better"
"The initial setup was complex."
"The operational deployment is not great."
"The solution is quite costly."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
"In my opinion, the GUI side needs some improvement based on my usage. Sometimes, it doesn't work as efficiently as the CLI side."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is ranked 6th in Access Management with 13 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is rated 8.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) writes " Facilitates packet inspection, modification, and offloading and offers visibility and troubleshooting capabilities, allowing for pre-production server testing". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and BeyondTrust Privileged Remote Access, whereas F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is most compared with Citrix Gateway, Ivanti Connect Secure, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID and Aruba ClearPass. See our CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs. F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.