The solution is more reasonably priced than its competitors. 

We subscribe to the yearly license and find it to be quite budget friendly. 

A high availability license was an additional cost so we opted to purchase the standard license but were later given high availability at no additional fee. 

I just wrote a purchase order for it. It is a $150,000 a year.

The licensing costs are around $250,000 to $300,000.

There are ways to deploy the license to different types of firewall. However, if we decide to change the physical brand of the firewall, we need to go back to Tufin and modify the licensing. This is a hassle.

The licensing costs are a significant amount of money.

The cost is too much. For us it's around $40,000.

We haven't purchased the license yet for SecureChange. We do have plans to buy it next year.

The additional piece, which we are buying and doesn't include our other solution, is close to 300,000.

I had a bad experience with the financial department, and the price is too high. The software does work and does the job. The solution is worth the money. If I had a different partner to implement the solution, it would have been worth the price.

The solution is paid monthly. We paid approximately €‎300,000.

I can't speak to the exact cost of the licensing. The pricing is somewhere in the middle. It's quite normal and not overly costly. I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability. There are no extra costs involved. 

Tuffin is expensive, and we have to explain to our customers the benefit for them to purchase. If we explain the benefits in the correct way they do not mind the price. We typically do costing for the customer for three to five years. We make the general total cost of ownership at the beginning of a project for our customers.

I believe our cost is more than $100,000 per year.

Our licensing fees are more than $100,000 USD per year.

The price of Tufin could be lower.

As an architect, the pricing seems expensive to me. For what it does, I would say it's expensive. 

While licensing varies greatly, it is about $50,000 a year.

Our licensing fees are approximately $250,000 USD.

You need to approach it from a cost perspective. If you have to go through and analyze a rule base, it’s going to take you months and months and a lot of people. If you use Tufin, right off the bat, it’s collecting the information and it’s going to tell you what’s been hit or not. It will tell you how many hits on each source/destination address, and services.

It is expensive, but as compared to other players, it's more or less okay. Their pricing is not very transparent. This is my biggest point regarding Tufin. I've never seen a price list or something like that. It's always individual, and in many cases, it's very confusing to know what is the base and what is the price.

We have not performed a cost analysis on other similar products, but I'm confident that Tufin does and remains cost comparable.

The pricing is reasonable.

Our licensing costs are pretty low. We were grandfathered in, so we are at about $35,000 per year.

Turning on certain options in the solution comes at an additional cost.

Licensing is available in both perpetual and subscription models, and it appears to be good for our scalable environments. We have also needed to work with what we call small enforcement point pricing, which we'll probably get more into as people expand.

As far as licensing goes, the good thing is that the licensing for the firewalls is great. The licensing changes for the routers has improved because we no longer have to pay for topology monitoring.

The licensing costs for this solution are decent for the services provided. From my perspective, the prices should be higher because the organization that often uses this solution is critical.

There is a permanent license for devices, but it's not relative to a device itself. Once you purchase 10 licenses for virtual appliances or virtual context, you can put them into different virtual firewalls, but you can reuse these licenses for other devices if you don't need them for the old ones. 

For example, if you deploy new ones, and you don't need these licenses for the old context, you can redeploy them in another one relative to a device, like a Mac address.

The problem is that once you redeploy the license for another context, another rhythm, or another virtual appliance, you lose all the history and reports from the Syslog from the old one.

The price is on the cheaper side. I'm not planning on adding additional resources, and I don't expect any additional costs.

There is no issue with the pricing because we used a VM. That kept the cost low, as compared to an appliance. The licensing cost quote met our budget.

Its price is reasonable, but it could be lower. It has been cost-effective for us. We have a contract for three years.

The billing and licensing aspect of the product is not something I'm a part of. I don't have any insights into the costs involved in using the solution. I cannot see if there's just a flat licensing fee or if there are other costs needed on top of that.

Licensing is on a customer by customer basis.

The seller of Tufin, when I wanted the solution, was very flexible because the cost on the lease was very high in Latin America. So, he was able to reduce the cost.

The current licensing scheme is quite confusing but it is clearer than the old one. If you have one MDS you just buy the MDS license and the gateway license. That's most of it.

Before this, they broke it down into VS, virtual environment, physical environment, single boxes, cluster boxes. Now the licensing part is much more straightforward. If you have ten gateways you don't need to define one as a single and another as a cluster gateway.

Pricing is quite high. We did compare it with AlgoSec but the pricing is not much different between the two.

Tufin is expensive but it is very good.

Because we're quite a large company, the initial price wasn't too much of a factor for us. This is because the ROI was so significant for us.

Their pricing is too expensive, and I think they're one of the best products on the market but I think they can't get enough market share because of the pricing (the licensing). It's too expensive. They changed licensing models a couple of times I think, but I think they need to be more cognizant of the middle market, as far as licensing. 

Licensing costs are charged every year.

The cost is pretty high. It's close to seven figures. That only goes to show our commitment to using the solution and the products to reach our goals.

I don't have any issue with the pricing, however, I was not the purchaser. I can't speak to the exact cost for our company.

Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years.

Our licensing fees are approximately $100,000 USD yearly.

It's not that expensive, except for Security Groups. For us, just the Security Groups were about half of the total price. The total was about €500,000 a year, of which €200,000 was for Security Groups. For the rest, it's not that expensive, given all the benefits we will get and all the time we will save.

Pricing played a big part here. We didn't present AlgoSec or FireMon. We got good support from Tufin directly. We managed to position it with an effective price for the customer. The customer had evaluated other products but, due to price as well as support, they chose Tufin.

Price could always be better, but there are always consequences. Normally, there are other issues that come into play. For example, you pay more and expect to lean on the vendor more for the services and support.

Spend the time to evaluate all of the components of the Tufin suite. When you bundle different features together and you bundle components, you get a better price.

The licensing is expensive. Maybe for a big company, the price and the licensing is not a problem. For a small or medium company, though, it could be an issue.

Pricing is correct. You've got one or several appliances and pricing is not too high. After licensing is per firewall managed by the tool, so you can grow smoothly.

I suggest talking with Tufin about the flexibility of the pricing structure.

I was involved with the pricing at the start. But then management took over that issue. In terms of affordability, this company is using it, so it seems they are fine with it. We just provide management with our requirements and it's their concern and responsibility to bring us what we need. Since we still have this solution, I think they are fine with it. But it's a management call.

The pricing could be a bit better. It's definitely not the least expensive option. It would be ideal if the product pricing came down a bit so that it was more competitive. The clients would appreciate that a lot.

The licensing costs are charged annually but are higher than similar products.

When I did the self-service for licensing, I encountered some issues. Perhaps it’s because I didn’t know how many we had purchased before I had arrived, as it was sold through a WebEx.

Nominal and market competitive.

I think the pricing, comparatively, is good.

It's quite an expensive solution.