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

MetaAccess vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

 

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

MetaAccess
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
20th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
2.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (4th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of MetaAccess is 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.1%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.1%
MetaAccess0.8%
Other97.1%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

JD
Delivery Lead at altisec
Positive support experience and affordability boost overall satisfaction
The OESIS framework platform has been developed by OPSWAT itself. They license it to other OEMs for posture assessment, and they are pioneers in this particular field. The rest of the features are the same when compared head-to-head because all NAC works seamlessly. The advantage is this supports a virtualized environment, so you don't need to depend on hardware, allowing you to go live at any point in time. When discussing policy enforcement, it has predefined templates and objects that help draft a policy easily, reducing the need to define variables and create a policy from scratch. For instance, if I want to allow a certain network range, I just need to put out the network range, and they have that policy enforcer to help define the policy precisely. OPSWAT has an integrated solution for threat detection and response capability. If you are opting for threat detection, it will scan your endpoint, which is something no one else is doing. It does take some time for the scanning, but if you want your endpoint to get scanned for threats first, OPSWAT can do that. Regarding reporting tools and real-time monitoring capability, you get a detailed report of compliance as well as non-compliance systems, which is comprehensive.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business52
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with MetaAccess?
The only limitation is that customization is pretty limited. We have predefined templates available, but the granular customization is restricted. I am speaking with respect to the Indian customer ...
What is your primary use case for MetaAccess?
The MetaAccess product is primarily for providing secure network access, functioning as a Network Access Control (NAC). It first performs a posture assessment to check whether your endpoint is comp...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is good because it has a nominal price.I would say ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Pr...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
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 h...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to secure the server.A specific example of how I use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to secure my s...
 

Also Known As

OPSWAT MetaAccess
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Juniper Networks, Expert Global Solutions (EGS), PCWizrd,
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Fortinet, Cisco and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: June 2026.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.