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

Netskope Private Access vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (6th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (5th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), Application Control (4th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (2nd), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 3.0%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is 13.3%, down from 17.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform13.3%
iboss3.2%
Netskope Private Access3.0%
Other80.5%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
Prathamesh Samant - PeerSpot reviewer
Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zero trust access has transformed remote connectivity and now simplifies secure app usage
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience. I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"I would say iboss is a very good product; its scalability is very good, and it's seamless for the user."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"iboss has significantly lowered the number of security incidents. It is crazy how much it blocks and how much it is aware of the outside danger."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device."
"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."
"The main benefit for users from Netskope Private Access would be secure access from anywhere; they can easily access their systems or applications in their office premises or on-premises environment in a very secure way and the organization can also be assured knowing that whatever access they have been providing to their remote users goes through proper checks and balances before access is provided."
"They do one software or one platform; they are the leading CASBY platform in the world, and what they can do, nobody can do."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."
"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."
"Netskope enables users to securely access private applications remotely without a VPN."
"The platform offers advanced threat protection features and embedded AI/ML capabilities, making it more proactive in blocking threats."
"Zscaler CASB's latency and architecture are excellent."
"What I find most valuable in Zscaler Private Access is that it's a VPN, and its connectivity as a VPN is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"The scalability of the solution is great."
"The customer service and support are very good."
"It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The tool's scalability is good."
 

Cons

"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"Iboss is growing so fast that it is often hard for them to keep up with the challenges."
"SSL decryption: We had issues with learners using apps instead of using web browsers."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"I would like to see them go down the path of including SD-WAN. Currently, they don't do SD-WAN."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"Netskope Private Access allows mapping only one DNS server. If a user uses a secondary DNS on-premises, Netskope fails to disconnect them. This is an issue that needs to be addressed."
"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."
"The main challenge we are facing across various Trust Network Access (TNA) technologies, including Netskope, is their inability to support broadcast applications or those relying on broadcasting protocols."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"Netskope needs to provide some kind of data protection strategy as well because, currently, if you connect through private access, we don't have any data protection policies or implementation."
"The product is not easy to use."
"There could be more DLP-related features. Additionally, there needs to be flexibility for integrating ISP features."
"This is a great solution, I'm just searching for an alternative because the costing or the commercials for this type of solution tends to be a little high, although we have been using it for a year already."
"Those folks will likely have some issues."
"Zscaler Cloud DLP needs to improve its compatibility with other security tools."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
"Occasionally, issues arise in the LogStack by a third party, particularly for government websites accessed by numerous users."
"Sometimes, support takes time since the solution has some bugs that need fixing."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"In terms of market positioning, I would describe Zscaler Private Access as offering optimal pricing. Based on our experience, Cato Networks tends to be slightly more expensive."
"Zscaler SASE software is quite expensive compared to other solutions"
"It is an auto-renewal subscription service."
"Zscaler DLP solution is expensive, with a fixed pricing structure that is billed annually and monthly. There are no additional costs for licenses."
"It's expensive currently. But when purchasing for a large number of users, there's room to negotiate. It's really up to the procurement team."
"The product has reasonable pricing."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
"The product is a little more expensive than other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?
For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?
I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...
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 ac...
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
What is your primary use case for Zscaler SASE?
We are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for its Zscaler Internet Access service. It provides web security, DLP, data...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about Netskope Private Access vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.