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

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention vs Netskope Data Loss Prevention (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

McAfee Total Protection for...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
24th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Netskope Data Loss Preventi...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
16th
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 August 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is 2.1%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)2.1%
McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention1.2%
Other96.7%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

KM
Sr. System Engineer at Zensar Technologies
Data protection has improved as we restrict uploads to third-party sites and control devices
We are using customizable policies in the product. Everything is fine regarding alerting and reporting features; we got a notification as well as we received the required events, and it is working well. McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is different; whatever the logs are there, they are available on the ePO, so we cannot directly integrate DLP to any third-party tool. We need to actually integrate the ePO itself to enable integration. We are just restricting data to be uploaded, which is the best option that allows us to control organizational data, making it the biggest benefit for us in McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention. We are protecting data to be uploaded on third party URLs, which helps us meet our needs.
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

"The solution has good stability and endpoint."
"The whitelisting works well."
"The interface and administration are important because the data protection capabilities are already there, and the administration and the interface make it accessible and easy to use."
"McAfee is more user friendly than Symantec."
"Everything in this DLP is great. It"
"This solution has a rich set of policies and provides a level of protection even for removable devices."
"The user is given a high level of confidence, which is a very good feature of the solution."
"The stability of the solution can be good. However, the configuration takes a long time for it to be done properly."
"I find Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) easier and more appealing than Zscaler."
"The Real-Time Analytics and Reporting capabilities of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) are good and up to the mark."
"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 product provides visibility to manage sensitive data and control access."
"The product is flexible."
 

Cons

"For our new engineers, it is difficult to understand the McAfee DLP interface, or configure it in the deployment scenario."
"The user interface is messy and could be simplified."
"The pricing seems expensive both for the license and the support."
"The product is difficult to use. I don't like the McAfee product and have had a negative user experience."
"The price of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is expensive. It is not the most expensive solution but it is typically 15 to 20 percent higher than other solutions."
"McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention could improve by making the customer aware of the benefits of the solution which would increase the adoption. Additionally, if there were features to suit multi-cloud environments it would be helpful. If the solution can intelligently identify which is important data for the organization and should not be released from the organization without authorization would be a benefit."
"It was a struggle prohibiting email content from being sent outside the company."
"There are a lot of vulnerabilities and people can interrogate devices on a network and proliferate different forms of viruses or malware to infect a lot of things within the whole enterprise."
"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."
"I have not seen any benefits from this real-time analysis at this time."
"I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The pricing is moderate."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is expensive."
"The price is high for this type of product."
"The price of McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention is expensive. It is not the most expensive solution but it is typically 15 to 20 percent higher than other solutions. There is no additional cost to using McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The price of the solution could improve, it is expensive. We typically sell one and three-year licenses."
"I'm paying the license for McAfee Total Protection yearly. It could be cheaper, but it's fine."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"The pricing is moderate."
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
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention?
I rate the pricing for McAfee as competitive compared to other companies; they are in the same range, not a cheap product and not an expensive product.
What needs improvement with McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention?
Sometimes there are some issues in the product itself; whenever they release a new version, vulnerabilities come into the picture, and we need to update the product to mitigate such issues. Sometim...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention?
We are working with McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention and Trellix products in our environment, but not all the products; we are using only the DLP product. We are using DLP and devic...
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 separate licensing, and it would be beneficial to examine applications where the locat...
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, Shadow IT detection, and Secure Web Gateway capabilities. The primary focus is on...
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 should be provided with an interface to request exceptions in real-time for business-...
 

Also Known As

McAfee Total Protection for Data, McAfee Total Protection for DLP, Total Protection for Data, Intel Security Total Protection for Data
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kleberg Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention vs. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.