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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform vs Twingate comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust End...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
4th
Ranking in ZTNA
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (7th), Application Control (1st), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Twingate
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
12th
Ranking in ZTNA
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (12th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (15th), ZTNA as a Service (15th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Twingate is 0.9%, 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 Endpoint Protection Platform1.4%
Twingate0.9%
Other97.7%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Joey Benamy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cyber Liability Engineer at OncoLens
Helps reduce access-related support tickets, is quick to deploy, and streamlines onboarding
We were able to add Twingate into our infrastructure without having to change our infrastructure or how people work. We reaped the benefits of Twingate immediately because it replaced an alternative solution with a lot of overhead. Twingate helped reduce access-related support tickets by 80 percent. Twingate streamlines onboarding for our company, especially for the engineering team, by automating resource access through directory integrations. New employees generally require no manual configuration within Twingate, saving us significant time and effort. The resiliency is directly proportional to the level of control we exert over its components. We can manage Twingate connectors to support high availability, ensuring the system is as reliable as needed. This flexibility and control enhance Twingate's resiliency capabilities significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company and my clients' companies save on operational costs and expenses, and I would estimate we have saved at least thirty to forty percent."
"Overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is an ideal solution for any company lacking comparable protection, offering complete visibility into the environment, making it a recommended choice for every organization with computer systems in place."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform provides no-sweat security that we can easily deploy."
"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is good because it has a nominal price, offers good value for money, saves money because it is not costly, and I would suggest it for other companies and definitely recommend it to new companies if I had the opportunity."
"The customer service is excellent, ten out of ten."
"The customer service is amazing."
"We use it most heavily for elevation control, blocking and giving rights only to certain people or devices, and not allowing the rest to access the software. Elevation control has been second to none for me."
"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."
"I appreciate Twingate's developer-first approach, particularly its excellent developer tools for deployment and management."
 

Cons

"From a reporting perspective, enhancing the ability to customize reports would 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."
"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."
"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is expensive, but it is what you would expect because it is a comprehensive platform."
"We use other vendors for other components. I'd like one vendor to control all aspects of the business, including backup, EDR solutions, email monitoring, and control, rather than using multiple vendors."
"From my point of view, logging could be improved. Logging should be easier."
"There are some times when applications get submitted, the hashes don't really line up."
"Initially, the learning curve was slightly high for me, however, that has been resolved now."
"Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"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."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"Twingate's pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
883,619 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Retailer
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
18%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise8
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Pricing, setup costs, and licensing have been pretty accessible and manageable. It was not too expensive to get started, especially at a small scale for a smaller MSP. It is very accessible, easy t...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Going with the theme of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform being a one-stop shop where they have just about everything, and they have a really good product stack as is. However, t...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
We're a managed service provider, mostly dealing with small business office environments, so ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is used in the context of many different tools. It'...
What needs improvement with Twingate?
Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation. While it hasn't directly affected my company, I've encountered this issue when assisting others. Additionally, the ...
 

Also Known As

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Blend, Modern Health, Webflow, Liberis, Cerebral, Homebase, Bloomreach, Cameo, Hippo and Bitpanda
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: February 2026.
883,619 professionals have used our research since 2012.