We performed a comparison between Cato SASE Cloud Platform and Steelhead based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two WAN Optimization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The query and the SD-WAN are useful features of the solution."
"I haven't had any trouble, and practically forget that I'm using it."
"It's a pretty straightforward solution."
"The solution is a simple WAN solution. We've onboarded the socket on the Cato platform, and it provides connectivity. There is no complex routing."
"We appreciate the optimization and acceleration of the performance of SDP users."
"The product is efficient and easy to use."
"The solution is stable."
"The WAN aggregation feature is the most valuable."
"SteelHead works from the application. I use it to optimize traffic from Amazon. It is mainly used for customers who need to increase the traffic to 33K. For other users, it has been more of an operation."
"Scalable data referencing is a great feature."
"Steelhead is stable, and it can even help you avoid service interruption in the event of a power outage. If your hardware fails, technical support will replace your device quickly."
"The compression of Riverbed is very powerful. It can also handle large quantities of traffic."
"TCP optimization... caches a particular TCP connection and the next time a user uses that connection he will reach the destination easily."
"I find the most valuable to be the compression and exchange replication."
"It is very easy to install the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Steelhead is its optimization capabilities."
"The solution is not cheap."
"They should add more sophisticated security features. It should also be integrated into the cloud."
"Cato Networks could improve their intrusion detection. There is not a lot in place."
"Its functionality is a bit limited in some areas as compared to a Cisco solution. It is not as granular. It doesn't have the manageability, feature set, and capabilities of a larger or an enterprise-level solution. It just needs a more robust feature set and granularity."
"I would like to see better integration with identity providers."
"The tool needs to be more granular. Its reports are not very in-depth."
"The product must evolve into the endpoint domain."
"The different languages in the user interface should be enhanced."
"Application response time and network performance could be improved."
"I would like to see improvement in the solution’s configuration and protocol aspects. We have got some configurations that are not set. I would also like to simplify the call detection of some protocols."
"If we load a primary firewall, the secondary firewall usually handles all the active connections, but in Riverbed, this isn't the case. We lose all the active connections at the moment of failure."
"They should include a network switch in a future release."
"The solution needs to have alert notifications."
"One area for improvement is related to monitoring and visibility."
"The application response time of the solution can be improved."
"The product should offer more integration capabilities."
Cato SASE Cloud Platform is ranked 2nd in WAN Optimization with 21 reviews while Steelhead is ranked 4th in WAN Optimization with 22 reviews. Cato SASE Cloud Platform is rated 8.8, while Steelhead is rated 8.2. 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 Steelhead writes "Exceptionally stable and reliable but costly". Cato SASE Cloud Platform is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cisco SD-WAN, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet FortiGate and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Steelhead is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform, WAAS, Citrix SD-WAN and Noction IRP. See our Cato SASE Cloud Platform vs. Steelhead report.
See our list of best WAN Optimization vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all WAN Optimization 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.