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.
"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 solution is stable."
"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."
"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."
"It's a cloud-based solution that integrates well with everything."
"It is a stable solution...it is a scalable solution."
"The product is efficient and easy to use."
"It is quite simple and easy to use."
"The query and the SD-WAN are useful features of the solution."
"The product is very simple, and everything can be done very quickly."
"The scalability is quite good."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"Netskope is a one-platform security product that provides security functions. It is the most advantageous product in the Japanese market."
"Netskope has a diverse portfolio range, which includes cloud access security brokers, content filtering, behavior analytics, and security management."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"The most valuable features were related to discovery, data protection, and ensuring compliance with regulations."
"The product's analytics part is pretty fine."
"Netskope's control is user-friendly and comprehensible. It also helps in conveying information effectively as a company, making it crucial for customer satisfaction."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"The solution offers a better understanding of the real scenario and identifies the cloud apps that are being utilized."
"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."
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"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."
"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"
"The different languages in the user interface should be enhanced."
"They should include a web application firewall feature in the solution."
"For a packaged solution, needing external intervention or a system integrator to get other features not offered by Cato Networks could be an area for improvement. Cato Networks does what it's meant to do and is even overstretching capabilities when introducing new features. The product can only have very few features added on top of what its currently doing. Managed service providers can deliver the extra features you'd need. It's a set of managed services, and what Cato Networks does is very comprehensive. So, for the time being, when the actual incarnation of the SASE solution is deployed, Cato Networks is a very effective product. Naturally, technology will evolve, so everybody knows that in three, four, or five years, there will be a new kid on the block, a new game. Still, at the moment, Cato Networks only needs to improve a little regarding SASE delivery. The product is doing very well, but one feature the Cato Networks team is doing right is preparing for the future through deploying the SSE 360, so the security service is at that edge. It's an excellent strategy to prepare for the future. SSE 360 is what Cato Networks should invest in the most to keep prospering."
"The product must evolve into the endpoint domain."
"The solution could be made more user friendly for the administrator to use the portal. It is difficult to use it for people who are not experienced with Cato Networks."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"We would like the product to continue to improve its security."
"The tool needs to be more granular. Its reports are not very in-depth."
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"Lacking in local customer support."
"The configuration and user behaviour analytics can be improved."
"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"
"In terms of improvements, enhancing support, particularly for OEM support with quicker response times would be beneficial."
"The dashboard performance could be much better and faster, but because it is a complicated product, it takes time for the dashboard to process."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"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."
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.