We compared Netskope and Zscaler Internet Access based on our users' reviews across five parameters. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Netskope and Zscaler Internet Access are both highly regarded for their comprehensive data protection capabilities, advanced threat protection, and valuable insights provided by advanced analytics. However, user feedback for Netskope indicates a need for improvement in areas such as user interface, customer support, performance during high-traffic periods, and reporting capabilities. Zscaler Internet Access receives praise for its exceptional customer service, ease of use, scalability, and reliable performance. Areas for improvement noted for Zscaler include enhancing the user interface, addressing occasional connectivity issues, providing more customization options, and optimizing reporting and analytics features.
Features: Netskope's valuable features include comprehensive data protection, advanced threat protection, advanced analytics, and granular policy enforcement. Zscaler Internet Access offers robust security measures, efficient cloud-based architecture, comprehensive web filtering capabilities, and reliable performance.
Pricing and ROI: Netskope offers a straightforward setup with competitive pricing options and reasonable licensing terms. Zscaler Internet Access also provides a hassle-free setup at a reasonable price. Its licensing process is flexible and can accommodate various business needs. Netskope's ROI is attributed to improved security, data protection, visibility, threat detection, system integration, and cost savings. Zscaler's ROI focuses on network security, productivity, cost savings, ease of use, scalability, and reliable performance.
Room for Improvement: Netskope could benefit from a more intuitive interface, better customer support, improved performance during high-traffic periods, and more comprehensive reporting. Zscaler Internet Access should enhance the user interface, address connectivity issues, offer customization options, and optimize reporting and analytics.
Deployment and customer support: The initial setup phase of Netskope is quick, with the solution being deployed on the cloud. However, there are potential complexities and variations in setup time depending on customer needs. The implementation phase takes longer and requires coordination efforts. Deployment time ranges from a couple of weeks to three months. Zscaler setup can vary depending on factors such as the complexity of the setup, the number of users and locations, and the level of support needed. Some users reported that the initial setup was straightforward and easy, taking around 15 minutes to three days. Others mentioned that the deployment process took between six to eight weeks or even several months. Netskope is praised for its responsive, helpful, and attentive customer service. They offer prompt resolution to queries and knowledgeable assistance. Zscaler Internet Access provides exceptional customer service with prompt and helpful assistance. The support team is described as knowledgeable, responsive, and efficient in resolving issues or concerns.
The summary above is based on 50 interviews we conducted with Netskope and Zscaler Internet Access users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"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 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."
"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 has hundreds of features and many of them are useful."
"A very straightforward interface."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"The feature that I like best is the GUI."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"Technical support is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of Netskope is protection."
"Amazing reporting and tracking mechanisms."
"After a proper implementation, the maintenance is very low."
"The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic."
"We use ZIA for outbound internet connectivity. The internet traffic of on-prem users will be directed to the ZIA cloud for security checks and web filtering."
"Zscaler excels in security protection and the cloud is always up-to-date. It does not matter if you are a small or big organisation, you will receive the same security quality."
"Zscaler Internet Access protects using data loss prevention. If you have a CASB exposing your cloud out into the network, then Zscaler Internet Access will go ahead and control that unknown cloud application in the CASB, protecting it. There is also data detection with exact data match. This improves the data coming into your cloud so you are protecting it."
"The initial setup was straightforward. The biggest thing for us was to build our own policies. The deployment itself was only a few hours."
"In terms of management and visibility, there is a single panel where you can configure the policies for your entire organisation worldwide."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"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"
"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 solution's implementations can be made much easier because, currently, it is complex in nature."
"They could improve their mobile agents as they have some limitations."
"Compatibility with other proxy polars would be helpful."
"They can focus more on ease of admin, ease of use, and ease of migration. Migration should be simple for companies that are using a different platform and would like to move to Netskope. Everyone looks for a simple migration. They can also focus more on cloud services and cloud trends. They have to see the cloud market, and they should try to compete with Zscaler and other players. They should also work on licensing costs."
"The solution's documentation still needs to be improved."
"Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved. Sometimes the API won't be working, but Netskope is taking it seriously. They accept all the feature requests, and they are trying to provide whatever we ask from them."
"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."
"Setting up policies is something that we having been doing, and if the vendor were to provide example use cases that included different implementation options then it would be very useful for us."
"Zscaler Internet Access can improve by adding traffic filtering based on the DNS."
"The reporting functionality could be a bit easier to use. There is a reporting function, but it's quite hard to do any good reporting, from a user-management perspective. For example, if a department manager wants to know how his department is using the web, there is a way to get the data, but it's quite cumbersome to get it and show it well. And that's true for comparing between departments."
"The main issue with Zscaler Internet Access is proxy IP detection, which sometimes makes sites inaccessible."
"The performance needs improvement. Some areas create performance issues and, depending on the use cases, require reconfiguration to perform again."
"Cloud App’s database should be improved."
"Zscaler Internet Access needs to integrate more ISPs. It is good to have more than three ISPs."
"Do not expect to pay for the service and start using it, like Gmail. Zscaler requires a proper implementation to be done to make it successful."
"The pricing is an issue. It is expensive if you have all of your users in the same location. It is expensive compared to other firewalls on the market."
Netskope is ranked 4th in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) with 35 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Netskope is rated 8.4, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Netskope writes "Network proxy that provides visibility during deployment and allows you to control PII". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Netskope is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Cisco Umbrella, Skyhigh Security and Forcepoint ONE, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, FortiSASE and Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway.
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.