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

Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention vs Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cloudflare One
Sponsored
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
21st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (20th), Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (12th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (13th), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (8th), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (12th), Access Management (11th), Bot Management (3rd), ZTNA as a Service (9th), ZTNA (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (3rd)
Forcepoint Data Loss Preven...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Netskope Data Loss Preventi...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare One is 2.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is 4.8%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is 2.2%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention4.8%
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)2.2%
Cloudflare One2.0%
Other91.0%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

CV
Network Architect at IP Dimension
Cloud security has improved remote access and has reduced costs for smaller client sites
I have used Cloudflare One's Identity-Aware Proxy, and it is quite straightforward from what I have seen so far. The app registration on the Azure side integrates fully into Cloudflare, and I am very satisfied with that part because it is easy to set up. The integration of Cloudflare One's Secure Web Gateway and Zero Trust Network Access works without any issues. That part is pretty automatic, and if you complete the rest of the setup, it comes together by itself with no issues from my side. What makes it nice is that we can actually start replacing on-site firewalls at this stage for the smaller clients because it does not matter if they go to a coffee shop or work from home; they are still secured by the same connection. The hops get shorter and you get better latency. We have done testing to see if it is better. One thing that we did notice with our proof of concept with our current client is that they have people connecting from the UK. When they used their previous VPN solution, uploading CAD drawings and other files to the server took a long time. They mentioned that it is much quicker on Cloudflare One's solution. I definitely believe that is part of the improved performance, and I am satisfied with that as well. What is nice about Cloudflare One is that it makes the setup easier and also easier to train technicians to maintain it. Compared to legacy systems, we do not need to get fancy firewalls in place that are costly. That is definitely also a cost-saver with Cloudflare One.
Madhukar Pandey - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager, Risk at LTFS
Quarantine workflows have shifted risk to business and provide strong PII protection across channels
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention can be improved because the options nowadays involve the use of AI. The approach of Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is still very traditional, where I have to create the policy for each and everything. The AI component is missing in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, where based on user behavior analytics, it could give us suggestions. This type of improvement is needed in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. Additionally, the hardware costing goes up when it comes to Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention because it requires large resources in the implementation part. Not regarding the user interface, but nowadays other DLP solutions have come up with the CASB part and the SaaS platform they are providing. Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is still lagging there, and I have to rely on the on-premises setups. The management part has been difficult as I have to patch the servers, restart them, and regularly take backups. These are a few tedious things that I have to do while managing Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention. This part also needs to be improved in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention.
reviewer1595751 - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Manager at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Has improved sensitive data detection while requiring better support for data-at-rest scanning and classification
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separate licensing, and it would be beneficial to examine applications where the location of sensitive data is unknown. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) could improve data-at-rest scanning capabilities. Regarding DLP-specific improvements, data-at-rest scanning could be enhanced in terms of the applications supported, as coverage is currently limited to a restricted set of enterprise applications. Expanding application coverage would be beneficial. Additionally, data-at-rest scans should be made easier and faster to execute. Most solutions lack Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) functionality, and this capability is not yet mature. A significant limitation is that Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) does not support out-of-the-box data classification. Third-party integrations must be relied upon instead, whereas having built-in data classification support would be advantageous.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We mostly use Cloudflare WAF, and gets basic Cloudflaire DDoS, caching as extra bonus . We like the factor these features are all integrated into 1 console, simple to manage."
"It's the endpoint exposition. We don't need to expose our VPN server to the internet and need a zero-test solution. I can apply some conditional access to the endpoint that's connecting to our network to check their security policies or the security condition of their workstation. Once the workstation is trying to connect to my internal network, then I would like to check the discrete condition of these endpoints that are trying to access my internal network. We created some conditional access. We have CrowdStrike, to check if the CrowdStrike is installed, to check if it's updated, and to check for Windows updates. We created some conditional policies to check it."
"Cloudflare DDoS mitigates DDoS attacks."
"The best feature is rate limiting. If I'm expecting 500 visits per hour, Cloudflare will limit the requests if I suddenly get 50,000."
"What makes it nice is that we can actually start replacing on-site firewalls at this stage for the smaller clients because it does not matter if they go to a coffee shop or work from home; they are still secured by the same connection."
"Cloudflare is simple to use."
"It is a stable solution."
"For Cloudflare Access, I am using the free plan...The most valuable feature is their protection."
"In general, Forcepoint is miles ahead of its competitors."
"Regardless of the size of your company, this solution can be scaled accurately."
"The ease of configuration was probably one of its biggest selling points."
"The GUI is very intuitive. That is the way I would explain its ease of use. It is straightforward."
"Some good features are basically its UAV Analytics engine. And even fingerprinting is really good in Forcepoint."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint DLP. It's specific to copying to the USB or copying to the internal storage in our office."
"The fingerprinting technology is the solution's most valuable feature. It's unique to Forcepoint."
"The feature I found most valuable is the DLP. We are using it to do encryptions."
"The product provides visibility to manage sensitive data and control access."
"The product is flexible."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) provides predefined templates, indexed data matching, EDM, and OCR capabilities, and the role functionality provides significant information, and considerable automation has been built on top of the platform using the available APIs."
"The Real-Time Analytics and Reporting capabilities of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) are good and up to the mark."
"I find Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) easier and more appealing than Zscaler."
 

Cons

"Our subscription plan for the solution has a limitation of bot signatures."
"Our customers no longer use Cloudflare because its service is subpar."
"They don't have a person to provide support for customers using the solution under their free plan."
"The onboarding process can be improved a little bit."
"The tool should provide on-premise versions. Currently, all versions are cloud-based."
"Cloudflare DDoS has poor technical support."
"Cloudflare One is not very powerful, but for what we require, it is basic and sufficient."
"The pricing is an area that can be improved. Pricing, as far as I recall, was the source of our problems."
"Most of my customers are looking for the ability to control or shut down the USB port devices so that content coming out of the port is blocked."
"They can improve a bit in the OCR category. The OCR deployment could be simplified."
"It would be better if we could easily integrate with other products. Suppose I want to integrate this DLP with some other CASB solutions or a firewall solution. In that case, it takes a considerable amount of time because Forcepoint DLP doesn't come with a legacy firewall or CASB solutions to integrate with it. We need to do it separately. It's not improvised for different sectors, and I need to look for other solutions. I'm investing a lot of time researching and implementing other solutions for other areas. That is one point where I can't feel satisfied with this Forcepoint DLP. The only problem we have faced is that it consumes most of the CPU whenever a Forcepoint DLP is deployed on an endpoint. This is when users feel some lag in their machine's performance or their Internet performance. That's when we uninstall and try to reinstall, or we'll give a cloud link to which it gets access. We use Forcepoint DLP for endpoint protection, not for email or cloud. For email and drive, we went with the Google DLP. Forcepoint DLP isn't as efficient on drive or chat, or email. For that, we have some specialized solutions, but it would be better to have a single console where you can control all these areas. It would be pretty easy for a consumer who is going to use this product. All in one shot, you can try to track it and enforce your policies on a single dashboard. That is one point currently lacking in Forcepoint, and I feel they need to work on it. In the next release, I would like to use this DLP across different solutions like network, firewall, email, or chat with a consolidated dashboard and with integration facilities with other solutions. Security should work as a whole. It shouldn't work individually in blocks. It does not serve our purpose. It should be integrated with multiple solutions. For that, it should have enough intelligence to work with other tools. I'm looking forward to seeing that kind of capability with Forcepoint."
"Improvement in Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, especially when applying a positive DLP approach, needs to focus on decreasing false positive incidents."
"The post-optical character recognization feature could be improved because it only really works on documents with some length (at least three paragraphs)."
"I am really impressed by the interface and management console but the requirements are very high and the response time is too slow."
"With respect to the discovery component, the reports are very hard to interpret because they come out in an illogical format."
"Based on our experience, the stability has not been very good, but it has also not been bad."
"I have not seen any benefits from this real-time analysis at this time."
"The product should be compatible with multiple file formats."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) can be improved primarily because we were looking for any other provider due to the ZTNA feature that we were scoping from Netskope."
"Technical support has been rated low. Numerous bugs have been discovered in terms of functionality, and the support team takes considerable time to resolve these issues."
"I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The pricing is moderate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is not that expensive."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap. The licensing cost is also very low. I rate the cost and pricing a three out of ten."
"Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform's pricing is good."
"The price tag is no longer $200,000, but rather $300,000 to $400,000. It's twice."
"The prices are slightly expensive."
"The solution's pricing lacks transparency."
"The pricing is somewhere in the middle. I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"My company has to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs attached to the solution. There are no hidden charges apart from the licensing costs of the solution."
"The price of the solution is expensive."
"Forcepoint has been very cost-effective because they gave us a good deal while procuring the DLP solution."
"From one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing to be an eight."
"They are flexible regarding the pricing and they have a good model for an OEM data classification tool... Forcepoint has been one of the most competitively priced products over the last few years."
"Forcepoint offers a more cost-effective solution because everything, including OCR, is included in one package, unlike Symantec, where it is an add-on with an additional cost."
"The licensing is on an annual basis."
"The pricing is reasonable. That's why we went with Forcepoint. They were pretty competitive."
"One feature that I'm getting ready to take advantage of more is the ability to add more data crawlers to the DLP on-prem environment, without any extra Forcepoint costs or licensing needed for that additional data server. That will help in reducing the stress on the data server that we're using now."
"The pricing is moderate."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
19%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform?
In my opinion, Cloudflare One can be improved mainly through compatibility, as the integration should be much simpler...
What is your primary use case for Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform?
Cloudflare One's primary use case for my organization is to protect servers and to provide remote access with the VPN...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention?
Need to bare server cost if you are going for on prem setup. License cost is negotiable.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention?
Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention can be improved because the options nowadays involve the use of AI. The approach of F...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention?
My main use case for Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention is that I have used it for all three channels: the endpoint, web...
What needs improvement with Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separa...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is being used as a Secure Services Engine (SSE) solution for the CASB solution, S...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Remediation involves blocking specific communications when users attempt to upload sensitive information. Users shoul...
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare Area 1 Email Security, Cloudflare Bot Management, Cloudflare Gateway, Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform, Cloudflare DDoS, Cloudflare SASE & SSE Platform
Forcepoint DLP, Forcepoint Data Security Suite, Websense Data Security Suite
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

23andMe
Alphawest, Betsson, Cellcom Israel Ltd., Chelsea & Westminster Hospital, Confartigianato Vicenza, EverBank, Finansbank, iGATE, Landa Digital Printing, Northern California Bank, Reliance Capital, Remosa, Toyota, Scavolini, Zim Integrated Shipping Services
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention vs. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.