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

Digital Guardian vs Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

Digital Guardian
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
18th
Average Rating
6.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Encryption (6th), Mobile Data Protection (3rd), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (27th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (56th)
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Pr...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
44th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Digital Guardian is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Digital Guardian2.8%
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP0.9%
Other96.3%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Mubeen - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Researcher at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Enterprise data protection has supported regulatory compliance and integrates with classification tools
In terms of functionality, many features are valuable in Digital Guardian, as the first thing for most customers is that they are using solutions such as Boldon James and Titus, which fall under the classification side, and Digital Guardian can easily integrate with this data classification solution and has a very granular level of configuration and policy tuning. Digital Guardian's data protection policies are indeed useful for my clients. Regarding Digital Guardian, I find it to be a very good solution, and in fact, it is an enterprise-level solution that has very tight integration with most of the products, with Fortra but also with others.
SK
Cyber Security Engineer at Infratech Co
Policy management has improved data protection but configuration and encrypted traffic remain challenging
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode. Additionally, Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP cannot monitor encrypted applications such as Microsoft Teams because it is end-to-end encrypted. In terms of additional features, there are many aspects of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP that need improvement. Right now, two or three items are necessary, such as testing every policy to make sure they are configured correctly. We cannot go directly to production due to the extensive fine-tuning required, which typically takes two to three weeks to monitor the policy after customization. A lot of time has been consumed in the two to three weeks needed, which is something that should be reduced. Additionally, concerning the predefined policies, we cannot see the backend condition or backend script, which makes it difficult to modify the predefined policy.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The technical support is really terrific."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"Enhance your skills if you can to use Digital Guardian, in terms of data security, to its fullest."
"So if you look at enterprise data loss prevention this solution is the best."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"It primarily influences policy enforcement, cloud application access control, and endpoint network coverage."
"Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is purely a DLP-based solution, which makes it the best option available."
"We chose Forcepoint as part of our cybersecurity strategy, and one of the key expectations was to prevent data leakage."
"The most valuable features in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP include policy management and endpoint status, as well as supplementary servers, OCR, IRR, and additional features."
 

Cons

"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently."
"In my experience, the area closest for improvement is the occurrence of strong false positives."
"My biggest lesson learned from dealing with this product is that they commit to something but they don't deliver it."
"For vendor support, such as Fortra support, I would rate it a seven because all the support comes from different parts that sometimes have challenges meeting time zones, and sometimes they reroute to distributors and rely on partners."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"I think the whole system needs improvement, even though it works fine the way they designed it."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"The deployment is a little bit difficult. It requires two to three separate servers for databases and the application."
"From an end user's perspective, it's not always clear what's happening with the DLP. It would be beneficial to have more use cases available, perhaps on a countrywide basis."
"In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode."
"The SaaS solution needs improvement, especially the malware-centric part, although the CASB is better but mostly data-centric. The after-sale support could also be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Digital Guardian is on the higher end compared to other vendors."
"The price of Digital Guardian is expensive."
"Digital Guardian has both, subscription and perpetual licenses, but I think when everything (all technologies) will go to the cloud they will only offer subscriptions."
"If I compare Digital Guardian with Symantec, the license cost is lower, but McAfee can be cheaper than Digital Guardian. It depends on how many licenses you plan to buy and how big the project is. The cost is not so high as Symantec, but not as cheap as McAfee. They can easily sell the solution for price."
"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten because Digital Guardian is expensive."
"The cost was around $300,000."
"The licensing cost is roughly 90 US dollars per year, per license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Large Enterprise3
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Digital Guardian?
In my experience, the area closest for improvement is the occurrence of strong false positives. Digital Guardian can generate false positives initially, which can be significantly reduced through p...
What is your primary use case for Digital Guardian?
My main use case for Digital Guardian is to prevent or stop sensitive data from being copied to USB, email, or cloud, with an example being the blocking of confidential files from being sent via em...
What advice do you have for others considering Digital Guardian?
Digital Guardian has significantly improved incident response time by providing real-time detection, instant alerts, and automatic policy enforcement to stop data leakage immediately, which is my s...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is very costly, especially in Sri Lanka, but the compliance ROI justifies the investment.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognit...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
I have experience with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Netwrix Endpoint Protector, as I am currently working with both. My experience is primarily with Forcepoint. I am mostly working with Forc...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Fifth Avenue Theatre, Jabil Circuit
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital Guardian vs. Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.