Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Citrix Secure Private Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in ZTNA
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Firewalls (16th), Anti-Malware Tools (7th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA as a Service (5th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
Citrix Secure Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 5.1%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Citrix Secure Private Access is 2.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer8099174 - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure access with an intuitive design and straightforward controls
In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity. Additionally, expanding integration options with a broader range of third-party tools would be beneficial for seamless compatibility with various existing systems. As for additional features in the next release, it would be great to see advanced threat detection and response capabilities integrated into the platform. This would further enhance security by proactively identifying and mitigating potential threats. Additionally, improved mobile device management features and more comprehensive user behavior analytics would be valuable additions to meet evolving cybersecurity needs.
SK
Zero trust architecture strengthens security with seamless login experiences and reliable global access
The solution requires proper configuration and policy enforcement to avoid excessive access restrictions. Some applications may need additional integration efforts for seamless access, and I may face restrictions if device posture fails compliance checks. The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons. Initial setup and policy tuning can be complex, especially in large environments.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Overall, the unified agent covers endpoints as well as prevents web browser attacks."
"I find it very easy to implement and deploy in the organization."
"The application control and granular access feature are very easy to use, intuitive, and effective."
"Review of exported and imported packages and protection and content filtering have been useful."
"The product’s ability to block phishing sites is valuable."
"The solution provides high performance along with ATP prevention, policy management, remote activity, and IoT support."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"Now that we use Harmony Connect, the files are inspected and we are sure that no malicious content is inside the company."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix Secure Private Access is its Zero Trust architecture, which enhances security by granting access based on identity and device posture."
"Virtual desktops and virtual apps are most valuable."
"It is easy and simple, and it has got an easy interface. It is not hard to learn. With just three clicks, you log in, and you're there."
 

Cons

"The access to the portal should be faster. It shouldn't crash a lot."
"An improvement could be made in terms of achieving better coverage in such complicated regions as the Asia Pacific, China, and Russia."
"There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating."
"There is a hefty cost"
"The connectivity issue can be improved as at times it lags when connecting to their server."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"Regarding the support, the schedules can be improved since they are generally in another geographical area, and it is difficult to solve the problems with the time differences between them and us."
"Automation and scalability are areas where the solution lacks and needs to improve."
"When we go to print, we have to go through secure print. The secure printing kind of takes a while. It is a little latent."
"The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons."
"INGPU for engineering software is an area of improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The solution is priced appropriately considering its uses. For an essential license, a user pays only 30 USD per month. For an enterprise version, the prices can be negotiated with the company."
"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."
"The cost of the solution's licenses depends on the particular use cases."
"Regarding pricing, I can say that the more the number of users, the less they have to pay."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"The solution's pricing model may not be suitable for smaller companies, as they might find it expensive. Larger companies tend to receive more value due to many users."
"The product's pricing model accommodates diverse needs and deployment sizes."
"There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. They should provide better licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Perimeter 81?
Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Perimeter 81?
It's essential to consider the organization's specific requirements and budget. Here are some general recommendations: * Evaluate your needs * Understand pricing models * Request a quote * Compare ...
What needs improvement with Perimeter 81?
In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity. Additionally, expanding integration options wit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point Quantum SASE
Citrix Secure Workspace Access, Citrix Access Control, Citrix Secure Internet Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
The Messenger
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Citrix Secure Private Access and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.