Named User vs. Concurrent Session Licensing
Choosing the right licensing model can dramatically change your software cost and how easily your team grows. Here's how the two models differ, the trade-offs of each, and why the break-even point for most organizations lands around 50% average usage.
How each model works
Named User Licensing
A license is assigned to a specific individual. That person can log in from multiple devices, but the license is tied to their identity — not to a shared pool.
- Each user gets their own dedicated license.
- Licenses purchased = max number of people who can ever use the system.
- An inactive user still "occupies" a license until it's reassigned.
Concurrent Session Licensing
Licenses are shared across a pool. You can register far more users than licenses, but only a set number can be logged in at the same time.
- Example: 100 employees share 30 concurrent licenses.
- Any 30 can work at once; the 31st waits until a seat frees up.
- Sized to peak "busy-hour" usage — not total headcount.
The 50% break-even rule
In many organizations, the financial break-even between named and concurrent licensing lands around 50% average usage.
Simple scenario — 100 employees, equal per-unit cost
| Average Concurrent Usage | Concurrent Licenses | Named Licenses | More Cost-Effective |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30% — 30 active | ≈ 30 | 100 | Concurrent |
| 50% — 50 active | ≈ 50 | 100 | Break-even |
| 80% — 80 active | ≈ 80 | 100 | Named (simpler) |
Around the 50% mark, the concurrent licenses you need approach half your user base. The cost gap narrows, and the decision shifts from raw license count toward simplicity, predictability, and user experience.
Pros & cons of each model
Named User
Advantages
- Predictable access. Every licensed user logs in any time — no waiting for a seat.
- Simpler support. Easy to know exactly who is licensed.
- Clear accountability. Logs and policies map directly to individuals.
- Best for heavy users. Ideal when most people use the system all day.
Disadvantages
- Costly with light users. You pay per person even for occasional logins.
- License waste. Turnover and inactivity leave seats unused if unmanaged.
- Less flexible. Harder to handle seasonal or project-based workers.
Concurrent Session
Advantages
- Cost-efficient for mixed usage. Great when many users log in occasionally.
- Scales with demand. Sized to peak usage, not total headcount.
- Ideal for shifts & time zones. Teams reuse the same licenses at different times.
- Supports growth. Add users without buying licenses while peaks stay in range.
Disadvantages
- Access contention. At capacity, extra users are blocked until a seat frees.
- Monitoring overhead. Requires tracking usage to avoid outages or over-buying.
- Complex forecasting. You must understand peaks and future projects to size right.
- Policy management. Needs idle timeouts/auto-logout to free seats reliably.
Which model is right for you?
Choose Named User when…
- Most users are in the system a large part of the day.
- Blocked access is unacceptable for core roles (finance, ops, agents).
- You want straightforward, predictable licensing and billing.
- Compliance or auditing demands clear user-to-license mapping.
Choose Concurrent Session when…
- Your user base is large but only a fraction is active at once.
- You run shifts, part-time teams, seasonal workers, or many time zones.
- Most users are occasional or light users of the system.
- You're optimizing cost and willing to monitor and adjust usage.
How to decide in four moves
Measure usage
Review login & session data over several weeks to find peak concurrent usage.
Model both
Cost "everyone named" vs. "concurrent at peak plus a safety margin."
Factor growth
Account for new projects, acquisitions, or major business shifts.
Set policy
For concurrent, define idle timeouts and usage expectations upfront.
There's no one-size-fits-all answer
Named licensing favors simplicity and guaranteed access; concurrent favors efficiency and flexibility. For most organizations, the tipping point sits around 50% average concurrent usage.
Concurrent licensing often delivers significant savings.
Costs converge — focus on simplicity, risk tolerance, and experience.
Named licensing is easier to manage with minimal cost difference.
Let us model both for you
Tell us your headcount and usage pattern. We'll size named and concurrent side by side and recommend the most cost-effective Fortified360 license — with no obligation.