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

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway vs McAfee Web Protection [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (10th), Internet Security (4th), Web Content Filtering (4th)
McAfee Web Protection [EOL]
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1047669 - PeerSpot reviewer
PS & Technical Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Has faced usability challenges while managing integrated components
We are working with web gateway and full endpoint security. URL filter is a notable feature. While it is not specifically related to Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway alone, if you have the complete Forcepoint solution, it can integrate with other Forcepoint products, such as DLP solution and email gateway. The URL filter of Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is good for web gateway. Clients and consumers do not prefer it because the interface is not good. When using FSM with DLP, web gateway, and email gateway, upgrades cannot be performed simultaneously since Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway might need an upgrade while email gateway does not, despite having the same manager controlling them. Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway works well with banking and small companies. Email gateway is less needed as everything is moving to the cloud.
VivekGupta7 - PeerSpot reviewer
DGM at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Secure, reasonably priced, and performs well
We used cloud services for testing purposes. We used Amazon cloud services. Depending on the solution, there are a variety of options. There are several options such as Endpoint, WAF, NAC, and SIEM are currently available. A variety of solutions are implemented. It was a third-party implementation by Inspira. McAfee also provides an endpoint solution. McAfee's DLP is also present. Previously, we had used Trend Micro and Symantec. There is a method we had to upgrade our systems, a solution was required, and it had to match the three, four solutions from one company that were going to be cheaper, and there is a bidding process, whoever comes first, based on quality and cost, wins the competition. The requirements were speed, quality, and cost. Because Symantec was about to be renewed, our renewal would be more expensive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have found the ease of administration most valuable."
"The DLP functionality is very good, including features like OCR."
"Forcepoint has still proven to be the best for me."
"The technical support is very good, with very cooperative service engineers and a strong local Forcepoint team."
"The value of Secure Web Gateway is the visibility it offers and the ease by which we can put controls in place."
"We are happy with the solution for now."
"Everything is handled on the backend side. Users don't need to have any proxy on-premises. The solution handles all the dirty or initial traffic from their network, managing it on the backend itself."
"The most valuable feature is the categorization, where you can allow general access to an application but limit specific features."
"It has dependable anti-malware and intrusion prevention features all-in-one package."
"The product is quite an effective firewall."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it protects against threats that are coming from the web."
"The LiveSafe version works very well and has a very small price."
"I receive a monthly report and I've never had a problem so I presume that it's doing its job well."
"The most valuable is the blocking of blacklisted sites, a URL that is, either by intelligence or by McAfee, detected as a malicious site."
"Using this type of solution is best practice in the industry."
"I would recommend the solution to others; it works well for me and it is affordable."
 

Cons

"The product could improve its automation capabilities, improve integration with virtualization, and enhance its web filtering specifics."
"The reporting must be improved."
"AD authentication is buggy and not very effective."
"It has a problem with tablets and the iPhone. It's not filtering on these platforms. It filters on Windows but not iOS or Android."
"Enhancing the dashboard would provide better insights into users' usage patterns."
"An area for improvement would be the classification of websites - it can take a long time for new websites to be classified."
"Database synchronization failures"
"But the deployment could be easier. It might take from one day to three days. Usually, that involves an engineer from the vendor and a working team at the enterprise."
"Endpoints are lightweight agents, eating too much of the host resources."
"In McAfee Web Protection there are gaps in the security design, in the overall architecture, the gaps need to be fixed."
"The only thing I can think of that might be negative is that sometimes I get a feeling that web protection products are purposely filtering some sites that are not really malicious."
"The solution is stable unless there are dynamic components. If you have remote users then there are a lot of issues in terms of the replication that happens within the hybrid solution."
"McAfee Web Protection can improve the information provided for hybrid installations in the console. Additionally, having cloud protection would be good."
"The solution should be more proactive in regards to sending you updates."
"We need a better customer experience and more flexibility in the product."
"The solution could always use more security features. If it was more secure, it would be an even stronger product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is flexible. License pricing information is based on the customer, their environment, and on the future approach."
"The solution is priced a little high compare to similar solutions."
"Compared to the other products in the market, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway can be a cost-effective tool."
"It is quite expensive."
"The licensing is not expensive."
"It is a well-priced option."
"The pricing depends upon the number of users."
"Forcepoint's pricing is moderate."
"In McAfee Web Protection you have the ability to install any appliance you want with the same license. If you need an appliance on-premise, you can install it with the same license because the license is for users, not for appliances. If you need one more, you can install it and you don't have problems with the license or need to change your environment."
"It is not very expensive. It costs 100 Canadian Dollars per year per license. I buy one-year or two-year protection. The license covers my PC, laptops, and telephone. The cost is per user but for multiple devices. It has just the standard licensing fees. There are some options for extended protection. For example, if I wanted to have a VPN, there will be an extra cost. So, there are upgradable features, but I'm very happy with what it is giving me with the basic plan. It gives me the basic privacy protection that I need."
"The license number would be approximately $35,000."
"The pricing is cheaper than some of the other options that are available."
"$150 Canadian per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Internet Security solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
I would rate pricing for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway a two out of ten. It's really expensive.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway is not endpoint security. If we have a chance to change, we would change it because it is not user-friendly. The setup process is complex. You need to install FSM, whi...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway?
We have no big project, but we are trying to sell it in the market here. We are working with Forcepoint because there is no vendor working with this technology. If we have another vendor working wi...
Do you recommend McAfee Web Protection?
I highly recommend McAfee Web Protection. In my opinion, it is a comprehensive web protection platform with a great firewall. I find that it is a lot less bulky than competing solutions on the mark...
 

Also Known As

Forcepoint SWG, Websense Web Security, Forcepoint TRITON
McAfee Web Gateway, McAfee SaaS Web Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Adventist Health, Alphawest, Amadori, Anoka County, Compartamos Banco, Davies Turner, EverBank, iGATE, Karlstad Municipality, Lake Michigan Credit Union, Scavolini, Smurfit Kappa, Toyota
Sicredi
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, iboss and others in Internet Security. Updated: October 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.