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

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Citrix Secure Private Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

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

Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in ZTNA
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (7th), Firewalls (16th), Anti-Malware Tools (6th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA as a Service (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (5th)
Citrix Secure Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 7.0%, up from 5.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Citrix Secure Private Access is 2.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81)7.0%
Citrix Secure Private Access2.5%
Other90.5%
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

Nasseer Qureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Delivers seamless and secure remote access while enhancing security posture
Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) offers strong features, but there are areas that could be improved. One area for improvement is integration with third-party identity providers. It works with standard SAML and SSO, but we would prefer deeper integrations with solutions such as Ping for more advanced identity-based policies. Additionally, a mobile-specific client or lightweight agent would be helpful for securing access from smartphones, especially in BYOD environments. We would appreciate more granular reporting and analytics, including better drill-down capabilities to investigate specific users or app activity. The logs are comprehensive, but filtering them can sometimes feel messy. The user interface on the management portal could be more intuitive, especially when managing multiple sites or remote offices. Some of the policy configuration steps are nested and could be streamlined.
SK
Zero trust architecture strengthens security with seamless login experiences and reliable global access
The solution requires proper configuration and policy enforcement to avoid excessive access restrictions. Some applications may need additional integration efforts for seamless access, and I may face restrictions if device posture fails compliance checks. The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons. Initial setup and policy tuning can be complex, especially in large environments.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I find it very easy to implement and deploy in the organization."
"Its software solution also ensures connectivity and protects against NSF filtering."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"The application control and granular access feature are very easy to use, intuitive, and effective."
"I rate the overall product as ten out of ten."
"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."
"Virtual desktops and virtual apps are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix Secure Private Access is its Zero Trust architecture, which enhances security by granting access based on identity and device posture."
"It is easy and simple, and it has got an easy interface. It is not hard to learn. With just three clicks, you log in, and you're there."
 

Cons

"The Point locations need to improve the latency and speed."
"Sometimes, the product is very slow."
"The platform's pricing can be an issue for smaller companies, as the cost may be higher than for larger organizations."
"Branding could be better."
"As it is a new market solution, I still face some instabilities in access at certain times of the day when I have more than 150 users using it simultaneously."
"If Harmony SASE supported bidirectional traffic and the UDP protocol, it would be better."
"An improvement could be made in terms of achieving better coverage in such complicated regions as the Asia Pacific, China, and Russia."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"When we go to print, we have to go through secure print. The secure printing kind of takes a while. It is a little latent."
"INGPU for engineering software is an area of improvement."
"The licensing cost could be higher compared to traditional VPN solutions, and advanced features may require premium tiers and add-ons."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"I would rate Harmony Connect's pricing at six out of ten. It wasn't particularly expensive, but it wasn't super cheap either."
"The pricing is good, especially when you compare it to other firewall or UTM solutions from FortiGate or SonicWall, where you would have to invest about four hundred thousand rupees for 100 users over a three-year period."
"The solution is priced appropriately considering its uses. For an essential license, a user pays only 30 USD per month. For an enterprise version, the prices can be negotiated with the company."
"The pricing of Check Point is relatively high when compared to other competitors like Palo Alto and Fortinet. While Palo Alto may be on the higher side in terms of cost, Check Point's pricing is similar to that of Fortinet. In some cases, Check Point offers better value for the features it provides. We initially considered other options but ultimately decided to purchase hardware that came with three years of iOS. This approach eliminated the need for any additional costs associated with Check Point. I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"Annual licenses cost $30 to $40 each."
"The product is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The solution's pricing model may not be suitable for smaller companies, as they might find it expensive. Larger companies tend to receive more value due to many users."
"There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. They should provide better licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business53
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Perimeter 81?
Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Perimeter 81?
It's essential to consider the organization's specific requirements and budget. Here are some general recommendations: * Evaluate your needs * Understand pricing models * Request a quote * Compare ...
What needs improvement with Perimeter 81?
In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity. Additionally, expanding integration options wit...
What needs improvement with Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
The solution requires proper configuration and policy enforcement to avoid excessive access restrictions. Some applications may need additional integration efforts for seamless access, and I may fa...
What is your primary use case for Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I primarily use Citrix Secure Private Access ( /products/citrix-secure-private-access-reviews ) for Zero Trust Network Access ( /categories/ztna ), granting access based on user identity, device se...
What advice do you have for others considering Citrix Secure Workspace Access?
I rate Citrix Secure Private Access overall at eight. Although Citrix licensing can help customers save costs where Citrix environments are present, improvements are necessary given the competition...
 

Also Known As

Check Point Quantum SASE
Citrix Secure Workspace Access, Citrix Access Control, Citrix Secure Internet Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
The Messenger
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Citrix Secure Private Access and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.