We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Digital Guardian based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Forcepoint DLP comes out ahead of Digital Guardian. While the two solutions feature valuable endpoint detection and management tools, Digital Guardian’s support team, as well as its licensing cost leave room for improvement.
"The technical support is really terrific."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It has been scalable."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"The workflow remediation is quite good. That is a key feature because of which it has the upper hand over other DLP solutions."
"Some good features are basically its UAV Analytics engine. And even fingerprinting is really good in Forcepoint."
"The solution’s content classification is the best."
"I did not experience any crashes. The solution has been stable in my usage."
"The integration is great."
"It's fast and it prepares loss reports."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"Technical support has been helpful."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"Technical support could be better."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"Feature requests do take some time to implement."
"The protection of personal data needs to be improved."
"The ease of deployment wasn't as flexible as Digital Guardian."
"The deployment and troubleshooting aspects of Forcepoint need improving."
"The tool needs to integrate data classification."
"The support could improve Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention."
"They can improve a bit in the OCR category. The OCR deployment could be simplified. Right now, you have to set up a separate server to manage all the data going through the network, especially the images. Forcepoint could better integrate the OCR component with central management."
"There's zero Forcepoint presence in West Africa. Customers typically like having these things close to them. It would help if they had a presence here. Right now, Forcepoint West Africa has been administered from South Africa. Because of this, customers can't access premium support in our region."
More Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is ranked 2nd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 51 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention writes "DLP great for encryptions; tech support is quite helpful". Digital Guardian is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Faronics Deep Freeze, whereas Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector, Zscaler DLP and GTB Technologies Inspector. See our Digital Guardian vs. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) 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.