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

Menlo Secure vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 2026

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

Menlo Secure
Ranking in ZTNA
27th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (25th), Firewalls (54th), Cloud Security Remediation (6th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in ZTNA
6th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (3rd), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Menlo Secure is 1.9%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.7%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.7%
Menlo Secure1.9%
Other95.4%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701794 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Bluechip Enterprise at a manufacturing company with 51-200 employees
Provides strong protection and multiple use cases but struggles with market recognition
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco. What can be improved is market awareness and adoption of the technology. When selling it in the channel, regardless of how good the technology might be, success depends more on market adoption and awareness.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"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."
"We are not aware of a single compromise from the web since implementing the solution."
"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."
"The solution is invisible to our end users, so it doesn't have any impact on their work or performance."
"Either you have access to something or don't have access to it, and if you do, we can ensure, 100 percent of the time, that there is nothing malicious that is going to impact our system in any way."
"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"For companies that are considering ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, my advice would be to go for it, as it truly changes how you secure your clients and offers more opportunities to provide services to clients that were not feasible before."
"The customer service and technical support of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform are phenomenal, top-notch and top drawer, always willing to help and showing exactly where we need to look to ensure we can have the tools we need for the next time, reducing the need to call into support."
"Being able to move off of that and utilize ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for our PAM as well has brought our costs down by about thirty percent, ultimately allowing us to reap more of the benefits of the enterprise value."
"We use ThreatLocker's Allowlisting to whitelist specific applications and prevent unauthorized software from running."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform provides no-sweat security that we can easily deploy. We do not worry about our habitual clickers because we receive an alert if they try to do something, and we know ThreatLocker has already taken care of it."
"Feature-wise, the learning mode and the fact that it's blocking everything are the most valuable. I don't see why more companies don't use the type of product."
"From 1 to 10, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform as a 10; I've been super happy with it, advising other companies to just do it since it's a simple setup, easy to use, intuitive, and worth the money compared to potential losses."
"The customer service is amazing."
 

Cons

"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."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists."
"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."
"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."
"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."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that it replaced some tools, making it seem more competitive value-wise, but it is the flagship tool doing what it does, which means it is quite expensive."
"Some reporting areas need improvement. We need to generate more reports."
"I chose a rating of 9 out of 10 because it is a 10 out of 10 application, but I deducted one point because if there were an AI that could help us create policies, it could be even more useful."
"To become the best solution, some sort of integration or remote management, like remotely connecting, could be beneficial."
"It has not reduced helpdesk tickets. It has probably increased them by blocking applications and doing its job, resulting in people raising more tickets to know why they cannot use certain things."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by providing admin rights that allow us to manage it from the server by providing some token IDs or any kind of OTP if someone has rights and is on leave."
"I took off one point because sometimes it can be a bit complicated for new engineers, such as my teammates, especially for those who don't have hands-on experience."
"It has not helped reduce our help desk tickets. We are still in learning mode, and after we are fully knowledgeable, we will be able to see some ticket reductions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
"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."
"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."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"ThreatLocker's pricing seems justifiable."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business60
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise18
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
There aren't specific areas for improvement; however, they're not as well known as the big vendors such as Palo Alto. Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which mak...
What is your primary use case for Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
People are mainly using it for zero trust web access. Menlo Secure is built from the ground up to provide zero basic access, and by doing it that way, it has multiple use cases. For example, it man...
What advice do you have for others considering Menlo Security Secure Web Gateway?
Secure file sharing and data protection is not exactly what Menlo Secure is designed to do. While it can handle some of these functions, people typically choose another technology for those specifi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, you have a lot of information or a lot of alerts. However, the moment you zoom i...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform for identifying the most critical and sensitive information of the o...
 

Also Known As

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Menlo Secure vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.