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

Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection 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

Proofpoint Targeted Attack ...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
34th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (4th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection is 1.3%, down from 1.4% 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.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.7%
Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection1.3%
Other96.0%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

KC
Information Security Specialist at Methanex Chile SpA
Dynamic runtime engine and good protection, but needs better support and a single console
We have two to three issues per month. We contact Proofpoint's customer support for these issues. I am a major point of contact for support. If I am not able to resolve an issue, we will be reaching out to them. Proofpoint can take a couple of days to get back. I also deal with other applications from Okta and Microsoft, and we get the support within a couple of hours. There is a lot of difference between a couple of hours and a couple of days. So, Proofpoint's support should be improved. Okta and Microsoft are also able to do a Zoom or video call, but Proofpoint provides support only through email communication. Only if you request, it would be a Zoom or video session.
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 a dynamic runtime engine, which gives it an advantage over Prisma that has a static engine. In Prisma, we have to do additional malware analysis, which is not required in Proofpoint."
"Proofpoint's major module is email protection, and most of the spam emails that have been directed towards our organization have been locked by Proofpoint, so we have escaped from threat hunters."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped our company save on operational costs and expenses significantly."
"With ThreatLocker, we don't have shadow IT, and it has reduced ransomware."
"The time saved from dealing with ransomware nonsense is invaluable."
"It's easy to use in regards to reducing attack surfaces."
"By using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform, our company has been able to eliminate or consolidate security tools, such as BeyondTrust PAM, and we removed USB-Lock software by adopting ThreatLocker."
"If all of our vendors would act and support us like ThreatLocker does, we would be happy."
"ThreatLocker provides visibility into user activity and application usage, empowering organizations to define acceptable applications and web browsers."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
 

Cons

"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly."
"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly. The TAP console looks very advanced. Currently, we are maintaining three different consoles, and it is sometimes hard to switch between them or try to grab the data."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could be improved by being able to consolidate even more with an EDR for deeper scanning as needed."
"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."
"The support could be quicker. There are times when there is a delay in getting a response. This is problematic when immediate attention is needed."
"I find that the learning mode is too accessible. Technicians sometimes default to it instead of manually building policy controls. I would prefer the learning mode to be harder to access, ideally hidden behind a layer that requires creating at least one policy first before using the learning mode as a supplement."
"If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out."
"At the time, ThreatLocker does not have a great way to do that; you have to make separate groups."
"The user experience could be improved. Most complaints we get are based on users wanting certain functionality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"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 Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
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 Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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

Targeted Attack Protection
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Brinker Capital
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft, Proofpoint and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP). Updated: May 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.