Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 2026
Check Point SandBlast Network and ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform compete in the cybersecurity solutions category. Check Point appears to have an advantage in threat prevention, especially with its high catch rate and comprehensive threat protection.
Features: Check Point offers proactive threat prevention techniques, zero-day protection, and sandboxing, recognized for high catch rates and comprehensive threat prevention, including email and endpoint security. ThreatLocker emphasizes ring-fencing, application control, and zero trust strategies for granular control over applications and network interactions, integrating extensive training and support features.
Room for Improvement: Check Point could improve file type coverage, third-party integration, HTTPS inspection support, and user experience. ThreatLocker could enhance training accessibility, network load handling during policy deployment, and introduce sophisticated reporting features, plus consider an antivirus component.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Check Point benefits from a single security gateway approach with hybrid and on-premises deployment options, while ThreatLocker offers flexible cloud integrations including hybrid, public, and private clouds. Check Point has generally well-regarded customer service but needs more proactive technical support engagement. ThreatLocker's support is responsive, though ticket visibility could improve.
Pricing and ROI: Check Point is often seen as expensive due to feature licenses but provides visible ROI through enhanced security and reduced incidents. ThreatLocker is reasonably priced, offering significant value, flexibility, and integration capabilities. Both solutions report strong ROI via increased security efficiencies and reduced incident-related costs.
