We performed a comparison between Microsoft Purview Data Governance and Protegrity Data Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Governance solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."MIP also provides strong information rights management settings, such as the ability to specify who has access to content and at what time."
"Data authentication enables us to classify documents based on whether they should be restricted for internal consumption or permitted for external sharing."
"The product has helped us save both time and money."
"We can prevent, block, or audit however we like."
"Has a good interface and is reasonably priced."
"The data lineage feature stands out. It tracks where the data comes from and any changes made."
"I really like the entire system for auto-labeling content. It's a very refined system. I use the Keyword Query Language to define refined string-based metadata, and then I can really go deep into the specific data with the specific properties labeled in such and such a way."
"From my experience and customer feedback, one of the most valuable features of Microsoft Purview is ease of use, especially for content hosted within Microsoft 365 and Azure. I also like that the pricing model for the solution is reasonable."
"The solution’s pricing is moderate."
"The product is stable."
"Its technical support team is helpful."
"The most valuable feature of Protegrity Data Security is the reduction of information being exposed."
"Another area for improvement is in managing the business glossary terms. If they could provide the same type of method that we use to configure the scan rule sets, that would be helpful. Currently, there is no option like this, so we have to do it manually. Automatic detection would be great."
"Reflecting organizational changes within Purview is impractical."
"Support should be improved in the form of good documentation and video lessons where a person can check things out. There is a community, but it takes a lot of time if we want to get an answer to a question."
"Purview's data loss prevention for macOS endpoints has some limitations, and the end-user experience of recovering from a failure is lacking."
"The Microsoft Purview data connector platform, which supports ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, can be somewhat complex."
"The product needs improvement to edit the number of assets. It needs to be more inuitive as well."
"It could reduce pricing to encourage usage."
"he one thing it doesn't do is data quality."
"The solution's UI could be better."
"Protegrity Data Security could improve by having more integration."
"Protegrity is using a different OS which has some bugs. Sometimes it's causing an initialization error."
More Microsoft Purview Data Governance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Purview Data Governance is ranked 1st in Data Governance with 48 reviews while Protegrity Data Security is ranked 16th in Data Governance with 3 reviews. Microsoft Purview Data Governance is rated 7.6, while Protegrity Data Security is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Governance writes "User friendly with good documentation but needs to cover more non-Microsoft use cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Protegrity Data Security writes "Beneficial data security, good support, and straightforward initial setup". Microsoft Purview Data Governance is most compared with Collibra Governance, Alation Data Catalog, Varonis Platform, Informatica Axon and Microsoft Intune, whereas Protegrity Data Security is most compared with Voltage SecureData Enterprise, Immuta, IBM InfoSphere Optim Data Privacy, Oracle Advanced Security and IBM Security Guardium Data Protection. See our Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs. Protegrity Data Security report.
See our list of best Data Governance vendors.
We monitor all Data Governance 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.