Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Forcepoint ZTNA comparison

 

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

Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in ZTNA
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (7th), Firewalls (16th), Anti-Malware Tools (6th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA as a Service (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (5th)
Forcepoint ZTNA
Ranking in ZTNA
26th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 7.0%, up from 5.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ZTNA is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)7.0%
Forcepoint ZTNA0.5%
Other92.5%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

Nasseer Qureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Delivers seamless and secure remote access while enhancing security posture
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) offers strong features, but there are areas that could be improved. One area for improvement is integration with third-party identity providers. It works with standard SAML and SSO, but we would prefer deeper integrations with solutions such as Ping for more advanced identity-based policies. Additionally, a mobile-specific client or lightweight agent would be helpful for securing access from smartphones, especially in BYOD environments. We would appreciate more granular reporting and analytics, including better drill-down capabilities to investigate specific users or app activity. The logs are comprehensive, but filtering them can sometimes feel messy. The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices. Some of the policy configuration steps are nested and could be streamlined.
AR
You can add multiple features on a single agent, but it's an expensive product, and its marketing approach should be more aggressive
Forcepoint ZTNA isn't well-known in the market. Right now, it's a novice, so an area for improvement in it is making the product known. Forcepoint should create more awareness about Forcepoint ZTNA because a distributor like me still needs to promote it more to customers. Forcepoint has to capitalize on, focus on, or highlight its overall approaches to Forcepoint ZTNA marketing, such as SASE or SSE, to sell the whole bundle rather than as a standalone product. Today, most customers move to the cloud, so the whole SSE or SASE approach makes better sense. Forcepoint needs to look at the whole picture. I suggest being more aggressive in marketing to boost customer awareness of Forcepoint ZTNA.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has centralized management that allows administrators to supervise and control the security of the entire network."
"What I like about Harmony Connect is that every packet through the network is screened and filtered so that only clean packets can enter the PC. This is useful for a variety of security reasons because you no longer need to worry about things like DDoS attacks."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"Its most effective feature is controlling employee access to specific applications. I can manage and monitor every step of the access process."
"It's improved the security of every single OS in the organization as well as the visibility and security capabilities."
"One of the most valuable features found using Harmony is being able to monitor in a simple and orderly way."
"The product’s ability to block phishing sites is valuable."
"I find it very easy to implement and deploy in the organization."
"What I like about Forcepoint ZTNA is that you could use it as a starting point because you have one agent that allows you to add more features. Other technologies require one agent per solution, so you'll end up with multiple agents."
 

Cons

"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"I don't know if it is technically feasible, however, if the Desktop App could be used as a Web App or a Chrome Extension it would be very nice."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"An improvement could be made in terms of achieving better coverage in such complicated regions as the Asia Pacific, China, and Russia."
"Providing USB control in a Linux environment will give more control over data security."
"Automation and scalability are areas where the solution lacks and needs to improve."
"The product needs to work on the integration of alerts with different SIEM or security solutions."
"A Google Chrome extension would be handy instead of logging into the app."
"Forcepoint ZTNA isn't well-known in the market. Right now, it's a novice, so an area for improvement in it is making the product known. Forcepoint should create more awareness about Forcepoint ZTNA because a distributor like me still needs to promote it more to customers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."
"The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period."
"Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable."
"I would rate Harmony Connect's pricing at six out of ten. It wasn't particularly expensive, but it wasn't super cheap either."
"The solution is priced appropriately considering its uses. For an essential license, a user pays only 30 USD per month. For an enterprise version, the prices can be negotiated with the company."
"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"Overall I am very happy with the solution’s flexibility and pricing."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"Ninety percent of the feedback I received from company partners is that Forcepoint ZTNA is an expensive product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
872,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business52
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Harmony Connect?
The product's initial setup phase is very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Harmony Connect?
I am not aware of the pricing, setup cost, and licensing, but I would say the setup cost is our resource, and we have invested many hours into this project.
What needs improvement with Harmony Connect?
Check Point Harmony SASE needs improvement as it is a very new product that lacks very basic features, and it can start working more with the customer for better implementation. The product is lack...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point Quantum SASE
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in ZTNA. Updated: September 2025.
872,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.