We compared Netskope and Cato Networks based on our user's reviews across four parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Netskope is praised for its comprehensive data protection capabilities, advanced threat protection, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. Netskope offers competitive pricing options, positive return on investment, and excellent customer service. Cato Networks is valued for its pricing structure, connectivity options, network performance, and comprehensive security features. Users appreciate the customer service and support provided by Cato Networks.
Features: Netskope offers valuable features such as comprehensive data protection, advanced threat protection, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. Cato Networks is praised for its efficient connectivity, network performance, ease of implementation, management, and comprehensive security features.
Pricing and ROI: Netskope offers competitive pricing and a straightforward setup process, ensuring a smooth experience. Cato Networks also provides reasonable pricing and appreciated flexibility. Netskope offers ROI in the form of enhanced security, data protection, visibility, control, threat detection, integration, and cost savings. Cato Networks provides increased efficiency, cost savings, network performance, implementation ease, and secure connectivity for businesses.
Room for Improvement: Netskope could benefit from a more intuitive interface, better customer support, improved performance during high-traffic periods, and more comprehensive reporting capabilities. Users of Cato Networks suggest enhancing network speed and stability, improving the GUI, addressing occasional connectivity issues, optimizing support response times, and offering advanced customization options.
Deployment and customer support: Netskope users found the initial setup phase to be simple and quick, usually requiring just an agent to be rolled out. The deployment of the solution is also described as quick, with some variation depending on the customer's needs. The implementation phase can take more time, often taking around six months to complete. The initial setup and deployment of Cato Networks is straightforward. The timeframe for deployment varies depending on the type of customer and the number of branches or sites being implemented, ranging from as little as 30 minutes to up to six months. Netskope users appreciate the prompt resolution of their queries and knowledgeable assistance. Cato Networks customers mention consistent and effective communication, responsiveness, and helpfulness from the support team.
The summary above is based on 29 interviews we conducted with Netskope and Cato Networks users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The solution is stable."
"What I found most helpful in Cato Networks is that it works out of the box. One of its main advantages is that it's a simple product to deploy. You subscribe, and you're ready to run."
"The solution is a simple WAN solution. We've onboarded the socket on the Cato platform, and it provides connectivity. There is no complex routing."
"It is a stable solution...it is a scalable solution."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"It is quite simple and easy to use."
"It's a pretty straightforward solution."
"Cato offers all the functionality found in other solution. The life cycle management is always very stable."
"The solution is stable."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The most useful feature of this solution is Cloud Control, which allows me to schedule cloud uploads."
"A feature that was valuable was the built-in website classification or safety ratings. Different websites would be rated according to analyses that the Netskope team had done, and we built policies on some of those scores. If the website scored less than a certain percentage, then we would have a different user experience around how the site would interact with the clients."
"A very straightforward interface."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"In Azure, we have multiple subscriptions and with every subscription, we add some kind of instance ID. We can work with the instance ID so that we allow all of the instances containing nodules. Everything else, we block. This way, if you go to outlook.com and check your email, if you log in with your company account, the instance ID will show. The network will take action according to the instance ID and say, "You are using the enterprise email. I'll let you surf. I'll let you see your email." But when you try to log in with your own email address, like Hotmail or Gmail, the instance ID will be different. This way we are not completely blocking Outlook, but we are blocking people from accessing their Outlook. We are only allowing the enterprise-level emails, and we are not allowing user-based emails."
"Netskope is a really good product. I cannot segregate which features are the most valuable. We find most of the features to be valuable. It gives us what we are looking for."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"The solution is not cheap."
"Modifying or incorporating Cato Network to work with a third-party platform, such as Microsoft, or other Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offerings would be beneficial. Having more integration partners would help the users implement the solution."
"Cato Networks security could be better."
"They can't do one-to-one NAT (Network Address Translation) in AP (their access point), and that is something that Palo Alto can do."
"A little tweaking or improvement of the UI in terms of logging when troubleshooting would be an improvement because it's very detailed."
"The tool needs to be more granular. Its reports are not very in-depth."
"They can focus more on ease of admin, ease of use, and ease of migration. Migration should be simple for companies that are using a different platform and would like to move to Netskope. Everyone looks for a simple migration. They can also focus more on cloud services and cloud trends. They have to see the cloud market, and they should try to compete with Zscaler and other players. They should also work on licensing costs."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"It needed some fine-tuning on core business sites that we used, which were sensitive to what we term a man-in-the-middle certificate by design. Some sites were not tolerant because they presented as potentially malicious. So, we just had to make some tweaks so that it would bypass or interpret it."
"There could be better integration with other solutions."
"There could be room for improvement in the subscription process."
"The initial setup is complex and should be simplified."
"It should have user behavior analysis and diverse analysis."
"If we need to allow a process that is blocked by Netskope, we have to manually check the logs to see why it is blocked. This can be time-consuming and inefficient"
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 21 reviews while Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Netskope is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cato SASE Cloud Platform writes "Useful remote worker VPN, centralized management, and simple on-boarding process". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet FortiGate and Perimeter 81, whereas Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Zscaler Internet Access, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella and Axis Security. See our Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Netskope report.
See our list of best Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) 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.