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

Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox vs Proofpoint Email Protection comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Microsoft Purview Customer ...
Ranking in Office 365 Protection
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Proofpoint Email Protection
Ranking in Office 365 Protection
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (3rd), Digital Risk Protection (3rd), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Office 365 Protection category, the mindshare of Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox is 1.6%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Proofpoint Email Protection is 26.2%, up from 16.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Office 365 Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Proofpoint Email Protection26.2%
Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox1.6%
Other72.2%
Office 365 Protection
 

Featured Reviews

Mayeen Uddin - PeerSpot reviewer
Officer at SFIL
Dashboard functionality and data processing offer value with an easy setup
We are using Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox for email access The most important feature is data processing. I like the dashboard and the undo or multi-call feature of Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox. The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective. It feels expensive for individual…
AshishKochhar - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Team Lead at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Advanced email protection has blocked targeted attacks and reduces manual threat handling
I feel Proofpoint Email Protection is overpriced. I cannot say that the security level being provided does not justify the cost, but when comparing the similar level of security with other applications or security systems, it is overpriced. If Proofpoint could provide offers or discounts for customers who are already using the product or for new customers implementing it, along with some free services or add-ons, that would be helpful in terms of financial expense. Proofpoint Email Protection has recently introduced AI functionality in terms of data security capabilities and protecting AI assistance from targeted attacks. This is important since everything is now related to AI. The solution is doing threat detection and real-time threat detection and response pretty well. There are a few things I would like to see improved. Sometimes Proofpoint Email Protection takes time to analyze the workflow and the nature of the email. In this age of AI, the solution should analyze an email on the first receipt and determine whether it should pass or be marked as spam without checking previous data. Another improvement would be to have a more user-friendly dashboard. Additionally, if Proofpoint could add the same features in BCP as part of email protection in BCP, it would be helpful since I currently have to take a different add-on for BCP, and integrating it would save costs. I cannot say that threats have increased or decreased with Proofpoint Email Protection because it depends on the mail flow. The solution captures and filters out all threats, and the email threats vary every day depending on how many users are receiving how many emails per day. Today there might be 1,000 emails, tomorrow 5,000, and the day after 500. Proofpoint Email Protection does its job by scanning all emails and threats are reduced to some extent. Since I am aware that virus definitions are updated every day, I cannot blame Proofpoint Email Protection if they take time to determine the nature of an email being received. There are sometimes emails that are false positives, and Proofpoint Email Protection is a bit strict in analyzing false positives, sometimes stopping emails that are actually required. It analyzes the previous nature of an email and if a template looks like an informational template or related to spam, it blocks it because it looks similar to one blocked earlier. However, the template might actually be required. If I receive the same template today that is also blocked by Proofpoint Email Protection, that particular template might be useful and should not be blocked. In such cases, I have to raise it as a false positive stating that this is something in use or my users use and should be released. When AI starts doing its work, it analyzes the email from a sender with a particular template and releases it, but if the same email and template come from another sender, it blocks it according to the policies.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important feature is data processing."
"As a cloud-based product, it can scale well."
"Proofpoint is the main tool for blocking spam because it denies the connection altogether."
"Proofpoint Email Protection effectively identifies malicious links using URL rewriting and time of click analysis, which is very impressive."
"The Phish Alarm button allows users to submit questionable emails for review and complete analysis."
"Proofpoint Email Protection is quite scalable; I have not experienced any issues with the onboarding and offboarding of users and devices."
"Its anti-phishing functionality is the most valuable. Certainly, the biggest problem I have is phishing."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to remove bad messages that were delivered, prior to being classified as unwanted."
"The most valuable features of Proofpoint Email Protection are ease of use, data loss prevention, antivirus, and spam protection."
 

Cons

"The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective."
"I have not noticed much change in operational efficiency after implementing Proofpoint Email Protection, but the process execution is light."
"We'd like to have the ability to create more customized reports."
"Proofpoint Email Protection can be improved by using more AI-powered features."
"Proofpoint Email Protection's interface is confusing and could be improved."
"Pricing for the platform could still be cheaper."
"As a manager with multiple customers using Proofpoint Email Protection, having the ability to manage the admin console more efficiently would be beneficial."
"Regarding improvements or enhancements in Proofpoint Email Protection, I find the platform somewhat chaotic. It has too many different sections that perform the same function, which is very confusing."
"We have seen a reduction in phishing incidents with Proofpoint Email Protection, but not fully; it is not 100%, and there are still cracks within the walls of Proofpoint Email Protection that let this type of email in for various reasons."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution charges per user per month to use it. There are not any additional fees in addition to the standard living fees."
"They are competitively priced, but I have been forced to get quotes for other solutions now because they haven't been responding to requests to do the work that we would like them to do."
"It is expensive."
"Clients pay for an annual subscription of Proofpoint Email Protection. Every client always finds it expensive."
"We sell annual licenses for this solution."
"Pricing has recently been increased and the cost is a downside"
"The solution is expensive."
"It is on a yearly basis. Their floor for SMB doesn't matter. The user count is 100 users and below at $2,500 a year. Its cost is higher than other solutions. It is probably about 20% to 30% higher than what you would get with Microsoft. There are no additional costs. All costs are factored in. It can be improved pricing-wise so that it is affordable for the SMB market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Office 365 Protection solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise43
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox?
The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective. It feels expensive for individual expenses.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox?
We are using Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox for email access.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Proofpoint Email Protection?
I do not handle the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Proofpoint Email Protection, but I think it's a bit pricey compared to other solutions, even though we found no competitor with comparable...
What needs improvement with Proofpoint Email Protection?
Some of the old portal features of Proofpoint Email Protection are missing in the new portal, so some of the settings could be modernized. The TRAP mail gateway product of Proofpoint Email Protecti...
What is your primary use case for Proofpoint Email Protection?
Proofpoint Email Protection is primarily used for anti-spam purposes. As other companies receive a lot of malware, phishing emails, and unwanted bulk email, Proofpoint Email Protection stops unwant...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Proofpoint Enterprise Protection, Proofpoint Digital Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Blocket, University of Waterloo, Lincoln Memorial University, WellSpan Health, U-Haul, Carestream Health, Westinghouse
Find out what your peers are saying about Proofpoint, Mimecast, Sophos and others in Office 365 Protection. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.