We performed a comparison between NetFoundry and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"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 feature of the solution is that it is in the cloud."
"The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable."
"It is a stable solution."
"The best feature is the ability to establish the connection between your public network and automatically connect to the intranet connection."
"The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels."
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"Users get direct secure access to applications over the internet."
"The VPN is great for the stability on offer and for the cloud updates and insights you can get."
"It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job."
"The solution offers a simplified network infrastructure and security functions and it enables secure remote access for the users"
"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"
"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."
"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."
"The solution could provide internet access control."
"If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good."
"Sometimes applications crash on some machines, and we’d like Zscaler to give us some information as to why that may have happened. We’d like more detailed reports."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
"The pricing for Private Access seems to be on the expensive side, and I believe they should consider making it more competitive with other solutions."
"SCMP support would be one of the biggest improvements in my opinion. More speed improvements are also required."
NetFoundry is ranked 21st in ZTNA as a Service with 2 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 34 reviews. NetFoundry is rated 9.0, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of NetFoundry writes "Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". NetFoundry is most compared with , whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cloudflare Access and Perimeter 81. See our NetFoundry vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.