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

Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 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

Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Pr...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
36th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (9th), Application Control (6th), ZTNA as a Service (1st), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (4th), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is 4.4%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform4.4%
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP0.6%
Other95.0%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sumit Bhanwala - PeerSpot reviewer
architect at Tata Consultancy
Cloud-based platform simplifies device and data center management
I find it to be good. The solution is cloud-based with the latest inspection engines, which I find to be amazing. We are less dependent on data centers and device management, which reduces our efforts significantly. It improves our device management, data center management, and updating devices. We need fewer engineers for this management, and it reduces time and efforts for data center management, device upgrades, and IT support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We chose Forcepoint as part of our cybersecurity strategy, and one of the key expectations was to prevent data leakage."
"Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is purely a DLP-based solution, which makes it the best option available."
"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."
"It primarily influences policy enforcement, cloud application access control, and endpoint network coverage."
"What I find most valuable in Zscaler Private Access is that it's a VPN. Its connectivity as a VPN is its most valuable feature."
"The agent's versatility is notable, used for digital experience monitoring to collect valuable endpoint metrics for troubleshooting."
"The in-line DLP feature is one of the most vital features"
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"The solution is the best for storage."
"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 feature is its seamless integration capabilities, streamlining the process by eliminating the need for extensive installations."
"The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels."
 

Cons

"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."
"The deployment is a little bit difficult. It requires two to three separate servers for databases and the application."
"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."
"Zscaler CASB should include integrations with other SaaS applications."
"I rate it a seven because I am still working through some kinks from a performance and a support perspective."
"Zscaler Cloud DLP needs to improve its compatibility with other security tools."
"It's an expensive solution."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
"Another area of improvement is implementation through non-client connectors. The solution can be implemented in two ways. One uses the back file; the other one uses client connectors. So the client connector is pretty fast, but when it comes to non-client connectors and procedures, it's kind of delayed and slow."
"There could be additional ways to define proximity. Additionally, they should provide some exclusion options for specific policies and an ability to control the DLP engine."
"Sometimes, support takes time since the solution has some bugs that need fixing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost is roughly 90 US dollars per year, per license."
"The price is competitive."
"In the long run, cloud services are not inherently costly."
"Zscaler Cloud DLP is moderately priced. We pay around 2 million rupees per year."
"It is an auto-renewal subscription service."
"Zscaler SASE software is quite expensive compared to other solutions"
"There is definitely an ROI."
"The solution has increased prices this year."
"As per industry leads, Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise41
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
It primarily influences policy enforcement, cloud application access control, and endpoint network coverage.
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 the investment.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
The SaaS solution needs improvement, especially the malware-centric part, although the CASB ( /products/casb-reviews ) is better but mostly data-centric. The after-sale support could also be improved.
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure access service edge (SASE) designed to deliver network security in a cloud-deliver...
What do you like most about Zscaler SASE?
The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability.
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Zscaler SASE, Zscaler DLP, Zscaler CASB, Zscaler CSPM, Zscaler Browser Isolation, Zscaler Posture Control
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.