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

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs Safetica ONE 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)
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)
Safetica ONE
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
25th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Insider Risk Management (6th)
 

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 Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is 6.2%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Safetica ONE is 1.9%, down from 2.8% 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%
Safetica ONE1.9%
Other89.9%
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.
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.
SS
Sales Attendant at Zoffec Infotech
A cost-effective solution that can be used for regulatory compliance, but its stability could be improved
ESET Safetica is a basic endpoint-level DLP solution that gives the basic functionality at the browser gateway or endpoint ESET Safetica is a cost-effective solution for customers who need a small quantity along with a competitive price. Users who want the solution for compliance are procuring…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cloudflare is simple to use."
"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."
"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."
"Cloudflare is by far the most effective solution that I have come across."
"The capabilities of the software are strong enough for me to do what it's supposed to do. For me, we don't need to do a lot of configuration on our site. We just enable it and monitor it."
"The best feature is rate limiting. If I'm expecting 500 visits per hour, Cloudflare will limit the requests if I suddenly get 50,000."
"Cloudflare DDoS mitigates DDoS attacks."
"It will take the blow rather than our applications should an attack occur."
"Earlier, our customers had no control at all over compliance, and confidential documents that were going out were not at all looked into, and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has been a huge benefit to our clients in this regard."
"The solution is very stable and extremely reliable."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"I like the sensitivity labels and data security posture management for AI."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention has significantly improved our data security posture by reducing the risk of accidental data leaks and helping to meet compliance requirements."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's ability to prevent unauthorized sharing of sensitive information is valuable."
"The product is easy to configure."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"Safetica NXT provides you with an enterprise-quality data loss prevention system that anybody can pick up because the cost is low and it's easy to manage."
"When you subscribe to the DLP, the system manages and protects your files well from the cloud."
"The most valuable things about Safetica ONE are its comprehensive features, competitive pricing, and a strong focus on data security and compliance."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of Safetica ONE is simple."
"The current version of the solution is stable...It is easy to scale the solution."
"Safetica ONE is easy to use and set up. We can set up rules and policies quickly."
"This is a good solution, is easy to deploy and is scalable."
"ESET Safetica is a cost-effective solution for customers who need a small quantity along with a competitive price."
 

Cons

"Our customers no longer use Cloudflare because its service is subpar."
"Feedback could be enhanced."
"They don't have a person to provide support for customers using the solution under their free plan."
"The onboarding process can be improved a little bit."
"There are premium tier live service and lower tier live service, so we opted for the lower tier. But there is no medium tier where we pay a little extra and get a bit more service. So if that can be improved."
"I would like them to include a VPN feature to provide a secure connection to the data center."
"The pricing is an area that can be improved. Pricing, as far as I recall, was the source of our problems."
"Cloudflare DDoS has poor technical support."
"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."
"The major challenge we had was overreach. When our initial design inception blocked more data than we expected, we had a lot of help desk related issues that we did not see in testing."
"Endpoint Data Loss Prevention needs to be improved as it is not up to expectations."
"The main disadvantages of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention in comparison to the Netscope product are notable considerations."
"There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels."
"Because it's an academic institution, we got really excited about the level of granularity we could implement, but that granularity overwhelmed our users."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention can be improved as the endpoint DLP policy tuning can be complex in large environments, especially when balancing security with user productivity."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's licensing is expensive."
"Safetica One has every other thing that you need, so I cannot give Safetica NXT a higher mark because it does not have the full features of the enterprise solutions."
"There are some minor issues with the price and support of the solution that needs to be improved."
"This solution could be improved if it was available on Linux as well. Currently it can only be deployed on Mac and Windows."
"One area for improvement in Safetica is its firewall integration feature."
"The solution's most valuable feature is data leak protection."
"ESET Safetica’s stability could be improved."
"The product needs to improve support."
"Safetica ONE fails to support Linux."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 is somewhere in the middle. I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"The price tag is no longer $200,000, but rather $300,000 to $400,000. It's twice."
"The prices are slightly expensive."
"The solution is not that expensive."
"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."
"Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform's pricing is good."
"The solution's pricing lacks transparency."
"It's a little bit pricey compared to competitors, but it's not too high."
"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."
"You get the solution in a bundle if you get the E5 suite."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"I am satisfied with the tool's pricing."
"The cost works out to about $15 per user per month."
"Though I am not a specialist, the tool is quite expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."
"Safetica ONE is expensive."
"The licensing cost for this solution depends on the deal size and your use case. In our instance, it costs $35 per user per year. This is a reasonable price."
"The pricing for ESET Safetica is less as compared to other solutions. The customers have to pay only for the license."
"Customers need to pay for a yearly license per device."
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%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
 

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 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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare Area 1 Email Security, Cloudflare Bot Management, Cloudflare Gateway, Cloudflare Zero Trust Platform, Cloudflare DDoS, Cloudflare SASE & SSE Platform
Microsoft Endpoint Data Loss Prevention, MS Endpoint DLP, Microsoft Endpoint DLP
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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