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

Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

Cloudflare One
Sponsored
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
21st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (20th), Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (12th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (13th), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (8th), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (12th), Access Management (11th), Bot Management (3rd), ZTNA as a Service (9th), ZTNA (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (10th), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (3rd)
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Pr...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
44th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Netskope Data Loss Preventi...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare One is 2.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is 2.2%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)2.2%
Cloudflare One2.0%
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP0.8%
Other95.0%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

CV
Network Architect at IP Dimension
Cloud security has improved remote access and has reduced costs for smaller client sites
I have used Cloudflare One's Identity-Aware Proxy, and it is quite straightforward from what I have seen so far. The app registration on the Azure side integrates fully into Cloudflare, and I am very satisfied with that part because it is easy to set up. The integration of Cloudflare One's Secure Web Gateway and Zero Trust Network Access works without any issues. That part is pretty automatic, and if you complete the rest of the setup, it comes together by itself with no issues from my side. What makes it nice is that we can actually start replacing on-site firewalls at this stage for the smaller clients because it does not matter if they go to a coffee shop or work from home; they are still secured by the same connection. The hops get shorter and you get better latency. We have done testing to see if it is better. One thing that we did notice with our proof of concept with our current client is that they have people connecting from the UK. When they used their previous VPN solution, uploading CAD drawings and other files to the server took a long time. They mentioned that it is much quicker on Cloudflare One's solution. I definitely believe that is part of the improved performance, and I am satisfied with that as well. What is nice about Cloudflare One is that it makes the setup easier and also easier to train technicians to maintain it. Compared to legacy systems, we do not need to get fancy firewalls in place that are costly. That is definitely also a cost-saver with Cloudflare One.
SK
Cyber Security Engineer at Infratech Co
Policy management has improved data protection but configuration and encrypted traffic remain challenging
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode. Additionally, Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP cannot monitor encrypted applications such as Microsoft Teams because it is end-to-end encrypted. In terms of additional features, there are many aspects of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP that need improvement. Right now, two or three items are necessary, such as testing every policy to make sure they are configured correctly. We cannot go directly to production due to the extensive fine-tuning required, which typically takes two to three weeks to monitor the policy after customization. A lot of time has been consumed in the two to three weeks needed, which is something that should be reduced. Additionally, concerning the predefined policies, we cannot see the backend condition or backend script, which makes it difficult to modify the predefined policy.
reviewer1595751 - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Manager at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Has improved sensitive data detection while requiring better support for data-at-rest scanning and classification
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separate licensing, and it would be beneficial to examine applications where the location of sensitive data is unknown. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) could improve data-at-rest scanning capabilities. Regarding DLP-specific improvements, data-at-rest scanning could be enhanced in terms of the applications supported, as coverage is currently limited to a restricted set of enterprise applications. Expanding application coverage would be beneficial. Additionally, data-at-rest scans should be made easier and faster to execute. Most solutions lack Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) functionality, and this capability is not yet mature. A significant limitation is that Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) does not support out-of-the-box data classification. Third-party integrations must be relied upon instead, whereas having built-in data classification support would be advantageous.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has different options that can be used to differentiate DDoS attacks."
"The blocking feature is very good."
"It's the endpoint exposition. We don't need to expose our VPN server to the internet and need a zero-test solution. I can apply some conditional access to the endpoint that's connecting to our network to check their security policies or the security condition of their workstation. Once the workstation is trying to connect to my internal network, then I would like to check the discrete condition of these endpoints that are trying to access my internal network. We created some conditional access. We have CrowdStrike, to check if the CrowdStrike is installed, to check if it's updated, and to check for Windows updates. We created some conditional policies to check it."
"Enables me to work from two locations."
"Cloudflare DDoS mitigates DDoS attacks."
"Cloudflare, in my opinion, was easy to implement."
"Using Cloudflare One makes my work quite easy because for DDoS protection, all I need to do is understand the OSI model and click; it makes it easier than trying to write a command line or use a Linux command."
"Clover is the best product globally."
"We chose Forcepoint as part of our cybersecurity strategy, and one of the key expectations was to prevent data leakage."
"It primarily influences policy enforcement, cloud application access control, and endpoint network coverage."
"The most valuable features in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP include policy management and endpoint status, as well as supplementary servers, OCR, IRR, and additional features."
"Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is purely a DLP-based solution, which makes it the best option available."
"The product provides visibility to manage sensitive data and control access."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) provides predefined templates, indexed data matching, EDM, and OCR capabilities, and the role functionality provides significant information, and considerable automation has been built on top of the platform using the available APIs."
"The Real-Time Analytics and Reporting capabilities of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) are good and up to the mark."
"I find Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) easier and more appealing than Zscaler."
"The product is flexible."
 

Cons

"When there are any dynamic changes in complex applications, the tool takes a lot of time, making its analytics-related area a major matter of concern where improvements are needed."
"I would like them to include a VPN feature to provide a secure connection to the data center."
"They don't have a person to provide support for customers using the solution under their free plan."
"Cloudflare DDoS has poor technical support."
"The pricing is an area that can be improved. Pricing, as far as I recall, was the source of our problems."
"Cloudflare One is not very powerful, but for what we require, it is basic and sufficient."
"Feedback could be enhanced."
"The initial onboarding was causing us some confusion."
"In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode."
"The deployment is a little bit difficult. It requires two to three separate servers for databases and the application."
"From an end user's perspective, it's not always clear what's happening with the DLP. It would be beneficial to have more use cases available, perhaps on a countrywide basis."
"The SaaS solution needs improvement, especially the malware-centric part, although the CASB is better but mostly data-centric. The after-sale support could also be improved."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) can be improved primarily because we were looking for any other provider due to the ZTNA feature that we were scoping from Netskope."
"I have not seen any benefits from this real-time analysis at this time."
"The product should be compatible with multiple file formats."
"I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The pricing is moderate."
"Technical support has been rated low. Numerous bugs have been discovered in terms of functionality, and the support team takes considerable time to resolve these issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is somewhere in the middle. I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"My company has to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs attached to the solution. There are no hidden charges apart from the licensing costs of the solution."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap. The licensing cost is also very low. I rate the cost and pricing a three out of ten."
"The solution's pricing lacks transparency."
"The prices are slightly expensive."
"The price tag is no longer $200,000, but rather $300,000 to $400,000. It's twice."
"The solution is not that expensive."
"Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform's pricing is good."
"The licensing cost is roughly 90 US dollars per year, per license."
"The pricing is moderate."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
19%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform?
In my opinion, Cloudflare One can be improved mainly through compatibility, as the integration should be much simpler...
What is your primary use case for Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform?
Cloudflare One's primary use case for my organization is to protect servers and to provide remote access with the VPN...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is very costly, especially in Sri Lanka, but the compliance ROI justifies...
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, ...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
I have experience with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Netwrix Endpoint Protector, as I am currently working with...
What needs improvement with Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separa...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is being used as a Secure Services Engine (SSE) solution for the CASB solution, S...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Remediation involves blocking specific communications when users attempt to upload sensitive information. Users shoul...
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare Area 1 Email Security, Cloudflare Bot Management, Cloudflare Gateway, Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform, Cloudflare DDoS, Cloudflare SASE & SSE Platform
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

23andMe
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.