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

ManageEngine DataSecurity vs Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention 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)
ManageEngine DataSecurity
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
43rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Purview Data Loss...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (13th)
 

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 ManageEngine DataSecurity is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is 6.2%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention6.2%
Cloudflare One2.0%
ManageEngine DataSecurity0.7%
Other91.1%
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.
GM
IT Systems Administrator at Prokhas Sdn Bhd
Affordable and provides visibility into what the users are doing with the data
The file integrity monitoring feature is difficult to manage because some files are confidential while others are not. We use a different tool to classify the files as confidential and non-confidential. The sensitive data discovery and classification features are not of much help. It is a difficult process. The controlling features must be improved. The interface must be improved.
Rohit Jaiswar - PeerSpot reviewer
Soc Anaylst at Softcell Technologies Limited
Integrated controls have reduced insider risk and now protect sensitive data across our workforce
One standout feature about Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is the tight integration with Insider Risk Management and Defender XDR, as it gives much better context during investigations instead of treating DLP as an isolated alerting tool. We also use endpoint DLP heavily to control USB, copy, print, clipboard, and browser upload activity, which has been very effective for remote workforce security. The best features Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention offers include real-time policy enforcement, endpoint DLP, and deep integration with Microsoft 365 plus Defender XDR. We also heavily rely on sensitive information type detection, adaptive policy tips, and insider risk integration to investigate suspicious user behavior with proper context. Another standout feature is the ability to control USB copy, browser uploads, print clipboards, and cloud sharing actions directly from endpoint policies. The integration with Microsoft Defender 365 and Defender XDR helps our team in day-to-day operations because DLP alerts are automatically correlated with endpoint identity, email, and user activity telemetry, which helps the SOC investigate incidents much faster from a single workflow. The sensitive information type detection makes a difference compared to other tools we have used because it is more effective than many legacy DLP tools. It understands context, exact data patterns, document labeling, and Microsoft 365 native content, reducing false positives while improving detection accuracy. Another strong feature of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is auto-labeling and policy inheritance with Microsoft's Information Protection, which helps maintain protection even after files are shared or moved across workloads. We also value the user coaching or policy tip capability because it educates users in real time instead of only blocking actions, which reduces repeated DLP violations significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I'm very satisfied with the environment and the dashboard."
"Cloudflare Access is part of the Zero Trust philosophy."
"Enables me to work from two locations."
"The blocking feature is very good."
"Cloudflare DDoS mitigates DDoS attacks."
"Cloudflare Access is a stable solution."
"It will take the blow rather than our applications should an attack occur."
"Cloudflare is by far the most effective solution that I have come across."
"The detection and alert features are valuable."
"The product’s strict policies are its best features."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"The solution is very stable and extremely reliable."
"We have not seen any sensitive files leave via email, which represents a significant improvement."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"We can use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to manage devices and site policies."
"When you are going to use Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, most of the setup is already done by default as per your needs."
"If we can prevent information from going out, eventually, when a regulator is asking about our security measures, we can show what we've been doing."
 

Cons

"Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform needs to improve its documentation. It took time to do the implementation."
"They don't have a person to provide support for customers using the solution under their free plan."
"Cloudflare One is not very powerful, but for what we require, it is basic and sufficient."
"The onboarding process can be improved a little bit."
"Our subscription plan for the solution has a limitation of bot signatures."
"From a logging perspective, it is still a bit difficult to see exactly what users are being blocked with the current views."
"Feedback could be enhanced. While I work efficiently with Clover as a partner in Mexico City, sometimes the information and requests are easier to manage with more concrete solutions."
"I would like them to include a VPN feature to provide a secure connection to the data center."
"The vendor must provide a cloud solution."
"The interface must be improved."
"Technical support seriously needs work. They are not helpful at all."
"I rate the overall solution 3 out of 10."
"Technical support is awful."
"The scalability, in terms of the portal, could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have faced difficulties in identifying the options."
"To improve Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, I think it would be helpful if we could make bulk labeling easier, as it is a little cumbersome at the moment."
"There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels. It is a little daunting at first if you don't have prior knowledge, and there is a little bit of a learning curve for setting up the labels. Some of the setup wizards could be more helpful from an AI perspective. They can streamline the setup through more AI technologies so that you don't have to jump through so many hoops and different menus and dropdowns. It would be useful to have a setup wizard that is more hands-off and engaging for setting up the information type labels. If you tell them this is what we're trying to protect, it should basically start to lead you down that path of best practices. Such a feature would be great."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention could be improved with simpler policy configuration, a more robust reporting dashboard, and better support for third-party applications outside the Microsoft ecosystem."
"A site can have different containers where you store data. We have always wanted to apply compliance, labels, and policies at the container level, rather than to an outer shell or at the site level. That is something we have been looking forward to and I believe Microsoft is already planning something like that."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing lacks transparency."
"The pricing is somewhere in the middle. I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform's pricing is good."
"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 price tag is no longer $200,000, but rather $300,000 to $400,000. It's twice."
"The solution is not that expensive."
"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 prices are slightly expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"You get the solution in a bundle if you get the E5 suite."
"Though I am not a specialist, the tool is quite expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"It is a part of our Microsoft licensing. We pay for a yearly renewal. Its price is reasonable for the size of the organization we are. It is fairly competitive, and you get what you pay for. We have an E5 license, and a part of understanding the E5 license is to see what all you get with it. If you really look at it from that standpoint, you get a lot of value. You have Defender and all its security features in there as well. Their licensing is fairly flexible. They have different programs. We've seen ones where you could pay for up to three to five years in advance. There is also a monthly pay-as-you-go type of deal, but we're doing a yearly renewal and fixing the budget."
"I am satisfied with the tool's pricing."
"The cost works out to about $15 per user per month."
"We are using the E3 license for Microsoft 365 with the E5 compliance license add-on."
"It's a little bit pricey compared to competitors, but it's not too high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 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
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise15
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention?
The pricing for Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention was manageable for us because we already had Microsoft 365 and...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention?
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention can be improved as the endpoint DLP policy tuning can be complex in large envi...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention?
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is used for monitoring and preventing sensitive data exfiltration across Excha...
 

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
Microsoft Endpoint Data Loss Prevention, MS Endpoint DLP, Microsoft Endpoint DLP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

23andMe
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ManageEngine DataSecurity vs. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.