We performed a comparison between Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway and Zscaler SASE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 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."
"It is for secure web trafficking, and it is doing what it needs to do. It allows customers to consolidate and eliminate multiple technologies onto Netskope and just kind of turn the dial and use more features, such as CASB, VPN. SWG is another feature. You can monitor and govern all the traffic."
"There are a lot of features, but the groups that are created for the policy groups available with Netskope are already relevant to any industry. So grouping the policies is the easiest part and a valuable feature."
"We can connect cloud apps and monitor them."
"As Netskope is a cloud-based application, it is possible to analyze and distinguish personal and enterprise instances."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"Prevents data leakage and protects data."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is that everything is on the cloud. It has no on-premise hardware to deal with."
"The solution's CASB, DLP, and threat protection features are very good."
"The scalability is pretty good."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable."
"SASE's most valuable features are proxy and content filtering."
"Sandboxing, DLP, and SSL inspection engine are the most valuable features of Zscaler SASE."
"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 scalability of the solution is great."
"Yes, it is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once."
"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."
"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 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 solution lacks a good reporting feature."
"Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway needs to integrate IoT, which can help to control devices."
"Improvement in the solution is required in certain areas where the product does not provide access to its direct end users, who use the portal as an administrator."
"Cost competitiveness is its area of improvement. They will have to figure out how can they strategically price it because there are a few players in the game who have been doing it for a long time. They will have to figure out how to go to market on the pricing."
"Netskope can only provide the high level related to threats."
"There is room for improvement in streamlining policies. So what happens is that when you apply a specific Netskope policy, you never know the kind of content it will automatically block, or it will allow."
"The accuracy could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve its on-premise detection technique."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
"We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
"The area that requires improvement is their support. The current support is lacking."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
More Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is ranked 13th in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 13 reviews while Zscaler SASE is ranked 7th in Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) with 13 reviews. Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is rated 8.8, while Zscaler SASE is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway writes "Offer capability to create policy groups aligned with specific requirements for users, groups, and locations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler SASE writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway is most compared with Symantec Proxy, Fortinet FortiGate SWG, Cisco Umbrella and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Zscaler SASE is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Cisco Umbrella, VMware SD-WAN and Netskope . See our Netskope Next Gen Secure Web Gateway vs. Zscaler SASE report.
We monitor all Secure Web Gateways (SWG) 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.