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

MetaDefender Email Security Solutions vs Mimecast Advanced Email Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 2, 2026

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

MetaDefender Email Security...
Ranking in Secure Email Gateway (SEG)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (33rd)
Mimecast Advanced Email Sec...
Ranking in Secure Email Gateway (SEG)
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Email Archiving (2nd), Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (15th), Office 365 Protection (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Secure Email Gateway (SEG) category, the mindshare of MetaDefender Email Security Solutions is 3.0%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mimecast Advanced Email Security is 15.1%, up from 11.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Email Gateway (SEG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Mimecast Email and Collaboration Threat Protection15.1%
MetaDefender Email Security Solutions3.0%
Other81.9%
Secure Email Gateway (SEG)
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Senior Information Systems Engineer at Liberty Pumps, Inc.
Helpful support, and useful dashboards
They offer a feature called SmartLink neutralization. I have tried it before. It seemed to work most of the time; however, I had a few users for whom it just wouldn't work. Whenever they click on a link, it stays on the MetaDefender page, saying that it's scanning it and never moves forward. I haven't tried it in a while since then. Since I can't turn it off on a per-user basis, I had to turn it off globally. I have certain exceptions for not doing the sanitization, and how to set those up is not intuitive. It would be useful if there were a better way of doing that. Using digital certificates is hard. It would be better if it used Windows Servers' built-in certificate management.
HS
Email Security Engineer at Logic Infosecurity
Experience high detection and user-friendly policies with reliable email security implementation
The system is not user-friendly because you have to create policies that are mapped in a dictionary. As an IT engineer, I understand how it works, but explaining it to another IT person can be difficult. Having more user-friendly dashboards would improve the work experience. In Mimecast Email Security, checking policies in the dictionary or gateway is very complicated, and not everyone understands this process. If you examine the Check Point portal, it's user-friendly with easily accessible tabs that anyone can explore. With Mimecast Email Security, making changes might impact existing mailboxes. The portal is complicated compared to Check Point's user-friendly interface.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of MetaDefender Email Security is the CDR. Customers purchase this solution specifically for data communication, as the other features can be obtained through other technologies that most customers already possess. Therefore, data communication serves as the foundation for the platform."
"The sanitization is very good."
"The most valuable feature is called summary reconstruction which is used to deliver encrypted files to users."
"The security on offer is very good."
"The product is good; to date, we have not faced any challenges."
"I have been satisfied with Mimecast Email Security as a good solution."
"URL inspection works pretty well."
"The solution is scalable."
"Mimecast certainly helped my customers reduce phishing emails."
"Mimecast Mailbox Continuity helps companies continue to move."
"The platform's most valuable features are journaling and email archiving, effectively stopping phishing attacks."
 

Cons

"The DLP should be upgraded and has room for improvement."
"They offer a feature called SmartLink neutralization. I have tried it before. It seemed to work most of the time; however, I had a few users for whom it just wouldn't work. Whenever they click on a link, it stays on the MetaDefender page, saying that it's scanning it and never moves forward."
"Although the number of AV engines is good, it could be better."
"Mimecast needs to reduce the number of false positive emails; a big pain point for us."
"The solution is expensive in comparison to similar solutions."
"Its pricing can be improved. It is a bit expensive."
"I did have a problem with Mimecast. That is why I was looking for an alternative solution because their sender IP address gets poorly rated by Microsoft."
"The installation is not so straightforward."
"The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling."
"This solution can be frustrating. It blocks many things that should be going through."
"Their support should be improved. They are notorious for sending you to knowledge-based articles rather than actually talking to you, but that is, unfortunately, kind of becoming a trend with everything. In terms of features, I haven't had any complaints. However, I don't like the fact they moved to a paid training subscription model. They used to have a lot of free webinars for training, but they have started to charge for them in the past year."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"According to our customers, the price of MetaDefender is high and it continues to increase by almost 15 percent each year."
"The product price is moderate. I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"Its price is in the middle range. It is a structured licensing model where there are various components that you can add or choose to add or not."
"The product has good pricing in terms of return on investment."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing a ten."
"Two subscription options are currently offered: monthly and yearly. My suggestion is to opt for the yearly subscription as it can give some discount. The pricing isn't high as other cloud solutions are pricier than Microsoft's offerings."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is a bit expensive."
"The price of Mimecast Mailbox Continuity is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Email Gateway (SEG) solutions are best for your needs.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Educational Organization
11%
Healthcare Company
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection?
There is room for improvement since new threats are emerging. Considering the availability of new features would be worthwhile. Mimecast Email Security is somewhat expensive compared to the competi...
 

Also Known As

OPSWAT MetaDefender Email Security, MetaDefender Email Gateway Security, MetaDefender Email Security
Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection, Mimecast Web Security, Mimecast Mailbox Continuity, Email and Collaboration Threat Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Azizi Developments, Affinity Credit Union, Aftercare, Al Abbar Group
Find out what your peers are saying about MetaDefender Email Security Solutions vs. Mimecast Advanced Email Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.