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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Netskope comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Microsoft Defender for Clou...
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (14th), Microsoft Security Suite (11th)
Netskope
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.7%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 6.0%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope is 14.4%, up from 14.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Netskope14.4%
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps6.0%
iboss2.7%
Other76.9%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
FV
Security and Continuity Manager at Rolinco NV
Deployment has been seamless with insightful data categorization and enhanced control
The features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that I have found most valuable include the overall portal view, with bubble graphs which give us insight into what goes where in the categorization, nowadays with Generative AI but all kinds of categorization, collaboration, etc. That central view of the portal is very useful for us. The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility. Therefore, we can add more control, and we have already done so. This was not possible in the old solution, in the old CASB solution with Netskope. We now can see on the spot, and we do that almost weekly, what the end users are utilizing, which cloud providers or cloud apps they're using. The visibility into OAuth apps provided by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very good. The visibility into risk and risk management of our organization's Generative AI apps is very nice, as you can choose the category Generative AI and then see exactly what traffic has been going to and from Generative AI in the cloud. This makes us very insightful on what is used within the company. We have some policies on blocking specific Generative AI, and we use within our company one particular AI part, which is CoPilot of Microsoft. In this way, we can see what the end users are using other than CoPilot, and that makes us more in control. The effectiveness of the integration of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender XDR and defending against SaaS attacks is very intuitive. It works immediately if we create a new policy or in Purview or in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, or when we make an app unsanctioned by blocking it, then it is almost immediately, or at least within a couple of hours, effective on all the endpoints where the EDR is running. This gives us much better control over things than before.
AV
Cyber security consultant at L&T Technology Services
User-friendly console integrates robust security features for seamless traffic management
Netskope serves as a single web console carrying out multiple functionalities: Zero Trust Network Architecture (ZTNA), Secure Web Gateway (SWG), Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB), Web DLP, and firewall services. I can toggle between these features on a single platform, enhancing ease of use. In comparison, Zscaler requires multiple consoles for managing similar features. Having these functionalities integrated into one dashboard makes Netskope efficient and user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"This product is solid, fairly easy to use, and reliable."
"We have seen a 35% to 45% cost reduction with this solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its monitoring."
"It's a full engine that you can use to discover all your assets in the cloud, whether they are on a public cloud or a private cloud."
"The feature that helps us in detecting the sensitive information being shared has been very useful. In addition, the feature that allows MCAS to apply policies with SharePoint, Teams, and OneDrive is being used predominantly."
"The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility."
"Defender for Cloud Apps has given us good visibility regarding what we've allowed in our environment until now. It helps us to know our inventory, understand what our customers are using, and steer them toward safer practices."
"From what I've seen, it's a good product."
"Defender helps us control which applications are being used and gain more security insight into remote and hybrid users based on user identity and log in location. You can also integrate Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender for Endpoint to extend its capabilities."
"Netskope is a really good product; we find most of the features to be valuable, and it gives us what we are looking for."
"Their ease of use, the training materials that they got, and what the solution actually covers are all very good."
"The initial setup of Netskope CASB is easy, it is not complex."
"Their technical support is very good."
"Netskope is an efficient, reliable, and easy-to-manage solution."
"Technical support is good. They are very helpful and quick to resolve any issues we have."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that the support is very good and the dashboards are easy and intuitive to use."
"I very much like the interface, it's very straightforward to use."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"It is stable, but due to growth, it can sometimes be less stable than wanted."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"We are having trouble with our continuous reporting configuration and struggling with configuring the collector properly with our log parsing. We've also faced difficulties getting support for this issue. It's taken us months to figure this out after going through a couple of different support channels."
"The documentation could be improved as it is not updated immediately when Microsoft makes changes. Users must wait a few weeks for the changes to be reflected in the documentation."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."
"There are certain areas where the product could improve, such as some functionalities that did not work as expected."
"Sometimes the support is actually lacking."
"I believe it's only set to be integrated with Microsoft Defender for identity and identity protection. I would like to see it available for use with something like Office 365 Defender."
"If this solution were more robust then it would be much more useful."
"The Cloud App Security integration with external DLP solutions is not so seamless."
"I personally dealt with their support team, and the support was bad."
"In terms of improvements, the possibility to export the dashboards or the data directly to Power BI would be better."
"Netskope's pricing is very high compared to other vendors, and compared to Zscaler, Netskope has less capability."
"Third party integration with other cloud applications could be improved."
"They could add endpoint security features."
"Setting up policies is something that we having been doing, and if the vendor were to provide example use cases that included different implementation options then it would be very useful for us."
"The CSPM model needs to improve."
"The solution is still pretty new to the CASB environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"Our clients normally use the Microsoft E1 licensing, which is renewed yearly."
"Microsoft offers bundle discounts and a pay-as-you-go option."
"It has pretty good pricing."
"The pricing is a little bit high but right now, we are okay with it because of the compatibility with Office 365, Teams, and Azure AD."
"I'm not totally involved in the pricing part, but I think its pricing is quite aggressive, and its price is quite similar to Netskope. Netskope has separate licensing fees or additional charges if you want to monitor certain SaaS services, whereas, with MCAS, you get 5,000 applications with their Office 365. It is all bundled, and there's no cost for using that. You only have the operational costs. In the country I am in, it is a bit difficult to get people with the required skill sets."
"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."
"The price could be better and should be reconsidered."
"The product's pricing seems fair."
"I wasn't involved in the initial discussions about its cost. However, within the next year, by around June, I'll need to review the vendors' quotes. Typically, our procurement team handles the process by issuing an RFP to vendors to get quotes. From there, we evaluate based on pricing and may conduct a proof of concept to assess value."
"The pricing is competitive."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"There is a license required for this solution and there are many licensing models available. For example, what applications are covered as part of the license."
"I recall that the price was considerably cheaper than that of Zscaler. It was around 60,000 AUD for 1,000 users per year and included some training and some premier support offerings. If we wanted to take advantage of the CASB capabilities, then there was an additional subscription fee, for which we didn't have the budget. On price, I would give Netskope a three or four out of five because it's quite expensive, but it offers a lot of value."
"The price is in the middle range compared to other solutions."
"I would rate the pricing nine out of ten."
"Netskope is a premium service, and its pricing ranges from medium to expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise25
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
Which is the better security solution - Cisco Umbrella or Microsoft Cloud App Security?
Cisco Umbrella is an integral component of the Cisco SASE architecture. It integrates security in a single, cloud-nat...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Cloud App Security?
At the time of implementation, when the size of our organization was small, it was a more affordable product. Since a...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Cloud App Security?
The fidelity of the signal in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has been a challenge in some areas. There have been i...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify ...
What needs improvement with Netskope CASB?
Netskope's pricing is very high compared to other vendors, and compared to Zscaler, Netskope has less capability.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security
Netskope CASB
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.
NetApp, Genomic Health, Caterpillar, Apollo, Pandora, Continental Resources, Fractal, infinera, Tesla
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Netskope and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.