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

Intercept X Endpoint vs Menlo Secure comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

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

Intercept X Endpoint
Ranking in ZTNA
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
106
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (10th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (11th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (11th), Ransomware Protection (3rd)
Menlo Secure
Ranking in ZTNA
27th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (32nd), Firewalls (50th), Cloud Security Remediation (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Intercept X Endpoint is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

Suwandhi Suraweera - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers advanced filtering features and benefits from improved licensing and performance
There is a licensing issue with Intercept X Endpoint. Their licenses are user-based. Most of our customers use per device licenses, and they need per device licenses because they use one PC for multiple accounts. This creates a problem. There was one customer who complained about the slowness of PCs using Intercept X Endpoint. They use minor performance PCs, which causes their PCs to become slow.
Olivier DALOY - PeerSpot reviewer
Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues
The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"After that, the client switched to Sophos to get the protection they lacked. It either works or it doesn’t and Sophos works."
"This solution offers very good performance and it has great features."
"The most valuable feature is that it literally works. We have reduced a lot of complaints after switching to Sophos."
"I like the way it goes beyond the office space. Being a cloud-based solution makes it very easy to manage your endpoints within the office. In this time of COVID, you can also very effectively manage people who are working from home."
"Very stable solution."
"One reason why I have stuck with Sophos is because it grabs it and deals with it, and if it's known malware, it can quarantine it or delete it."
"It is one of the best in terms of technicality."
"The solution is scalable."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was not very user-friendly."
"We are not able to merge the sub-estates. If we create multiple sub-states and there may be instances where a user is in a different sub-state, it may not be possible for us to relocate that user from one sub-state to another through the console. We have to merge them manually which is not ideal."
"They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI. They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them."
"They should keep doing what they're doing. Both of them have entered the EDR/MDR space, and they're keeping up with their competitors. I have a hard time understanding why their capabilities aren't garnering more attention."
"It has a performance hit on a local laptop. There's an agent installed and we are bothered a lot by it because it seems to be using a lot of computer resources."
"To be a perfect product, the price would have to be a bit better."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Price-wise, it is good. Currently, we have a three-year plan."
"As I am not responsible for paying the bills I cannot comment on the pricing."
"Its price is reasonable."
"Compared to other solutions, such as CrowdStrike, we are most certainly happy with its pricing. We did a three year-business deal."
"The price of this solution is a little high compared to competitors because they do not have a proper pricing structure."
"The price of Sophos Intercept X is competitive."
"There is a yearly payment to be made. For each client, it costs around 15 dollars. There are no additional costs besides the licensing price we pay to use the solution."
"The price of Sophos Intercept X is expensive. The license is paid on an annual basis. There are extra features that can be added depending on the endpoints. The solution is priced twice as much as the Comodo solution."
"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."
"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Crodwstrike Falcon compare with Sophos Intercept X?
I like that Crowdstrike Falcon allows me to easily correlate data between my firewalls. Its detection and machine learning are very valuable features. Crowdstrike Falcon also successfully prevents ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Intercept X?
I would describe it as economical, but not much cheaper than other solutions.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sophos Intercept X
Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Flexible Systems
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Intercept X Endpoint vs. Menlo Secure and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.