We performed a comparison between NetFoundry and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"The Network as a Service that they offer is most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is in the cloud."
"We don't need to connect anymore. It is automatically connected when you log on in Windows."
"It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job."
"The solution offers a simplified network infrastructure and security functions and it enables secure remote access for the users"
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"The scalability is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of Zscaler Private Access is we do not have to connect to a VPN, it is seamless. It is more convenient for us because we use one agent to cover the internet and VPN access."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability."
"With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
"If they have a firewall capability, that would be good. Currently, because they don't have a firewall, we are required to put another layer of control on top of their solution. A built-in firewall would be quite good."
"The solution could provide internet access control."
"The area that requires improvement is their support. The current support is lacking."
"Users report application access or latency issues with Zscaler Private Access."
"Zscaler Private Access's reporting is poor. We should have more insight into the reports regarding what is blocked and allowed."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"It would be better if the Zscaler Private Access team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
"The stability could be improved."
"Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its collaboration with applications without compromising security."
NetFoundry is ranked 21st in ZTNA as a Service while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 35 reviews. NetFoundry is rated 9.0, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of NetFoundry writes "Easy to set up, stable, and helpful for integrating the systems that require a fast and reliable connection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". NetFoundry is most compared with , whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) and Cloudflare Access. See our NetFoundry vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors and best Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.