No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Citrix Secure Private Access vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

Citrix Secure Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Citrix Secure Private Access is 3.0%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.6%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.6%
Citrix Secure Private Access3.0%
Other94.4%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Enterprise Architect at Wipro Limited
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.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provided us the same experience anywhere on any device."
"Virtual desktops and virtual apps are most valuable."
"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."
"The convenience of being able to work from home is most valuable; it is not really different from working in the office, it is easy and simple, and it has got an easy interface."
"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."
"We are seeing a return on investment, especially with our managers and customers."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits my company by allowing us to be preventative instead of being retroactive or reactive."
"The customer service is amazing."
"If all of our vendors would act and support us like ThreatLocker does, we would be happy."
"ThreatLocker saves me a couple of hours per day dealing with threats and encrypting efforts elsewhere."
"The biggest positive impact ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has had on my organization is improved security."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"Using ThreatLocker is effortless because I can access it from an app on my phone, so I can help clients after hours. My client had an issue while I was at dinner, and I didn't have a tech on the problem, but I could deal with it from my phone. I can see what the client is doing and approve or deny it. It helps me deliver better service to my clients when they need it."
 

Cons

"INGPU for engineering software is an area of improvement. There should be better licensing options."
"The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons."
"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."
"Initially, the learning curve was slightly high for me, however, that has been resolved now."
"I chose a rating of 9 out of 10 because it is a 10 out of 10 application, but I deducted one point because if there were an AI that could help us create policies, it could be even more useful."
"Better visualizations of what exactly is happening in our logs would be helpful. There can be more visuals on what has been elevated. Presenting this in a more refined manner would be beneficial."
"While ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is a strong zero trust platform, especially for application allowance and least privileges, areas for improvement include policy management, reporting dashboards, user experience, and notifications."
"It would be beneficial to have a tighter integration into PSA systems so that approvals can be done directly without having to leave the PSA."
"The user experience could be improved."
"The support could be quicker. There are times when there is a delay in getting a response. This is problematic when immediate attention is needed."
"The user experience could be improved. Most complaints we get are based on users wanting certain functionality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. They should provide better licensing options."
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"The pricing is pretty fair, considering other solutions. Licensing-wise, it did not take long."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business56
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Citrix Secure Workspace 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 fa...
What is your primary use case for Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I primarily use Citrix Secure Private Access ( /products/citrix-secure-private-access-reviews ) for Zero Trust Network Access ( /categories/ztna ), granting access based on user identity, device se...
What advice do you have for others considering Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I rate Citrix Secure Private Access overall at eight. Although Citrix licensing can help customers save costs where Citrix environments are present, improvements are necessary given the competition...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Improvements for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could include some additional guidance in the beginning of setup. We were fortunate enough to work with an engineer for a lot of our setup and it w...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is endpoint protection, a zero trust platform for applications, We use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for application whitelisting and blackl...
 

Also Known As

Citrix Secure Workspace Access, Citrix Access Control, Citrix Secure Internet Access
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Messenger
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Secure Private Access vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.