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

Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 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

Proofpoint Targeted Attack ...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
33rd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (4th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection is 1.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 2.8%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform2.8%
Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection1.3%
Other95.9%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

KC
Information Security Specialist at Methanex Chile SpA
Dynamic runtime engine and good protection, but needs better support and a single console
We have two to three issues per month. We contact Proofpoint's customer support for these issues. I am a major point of contact for support. If I am not able to resolve an issue, we will be reaching out to them. Proofpoint can take a couple of days to get back. I also deal with other applications from Okta and Microsoft, and we get the support within a couple of hours. There is a lot of difference between a couple of hours and a couple of days. So, Proofpoint's support should be improved. Okta and Microsoft are also able to do a Zoom or video call, but Proofpoint provides support only through email communication. Only if you request, it would be a Zoom or video session.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has a dynamic runtime engine, which gives it an advantage over Prisma that has a static engine. In Prisma, we have to do additional malware analysis, which is not required in Proofpoint."
"Proofpoint's major module is email protection, and most of the spam emails that have been directed towards our organization have been locked by Proofpoint, so we have escaped from threat hunters."
"Since implementing ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform, I have significantly reduced the risk of malware and ransomware execution by blocking several unauthorized applications by default, reducing the number of users with local administrator privileges, and overall reducing my attack surface, improving compliance, and providing better visibility."
"My impression of the allowlisting feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it is awesome."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has positively impacted our organization by making our processes so fast, our operations super efficient, and more reliable now."
"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is good because it has a nominal price, offers good value for money, saves money because it is not costly, and I would suggest it for other companies and definitely recommend it to new companies if I had the opportunity."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"ThreatLocker Protect has improved my organization greatly."
"The Zero Trust factor is valuable because it blocks everything. That helps us to stay ahead of bad actors. We do not have to be in recovery mode."
 

Cons

"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly."
"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly. The TAP console looks very advanced. Currently, we are maintaining three different consoles, and it is sometimes hard to switch between them or try to grab the data."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform can be improved by adding budget control, so that we are more aware of our spending, because I know sometimes it can get out of control."
"I chose a rating of 9 out of 10 because it is a 10 out of 10 application, but I deducted one point because if there were an AI that could help us create policies, it could be even more useful."
"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is expensive, but it is what you would expect because it is a comprehensive platform."
"It has not helped reduce our help desk tickets. We are still in learning mode, and after we are fully knowledgeable, we will be able to see some ticket reductions."
"I cannot suggest anything that they are not already doing. They should keep adding features as they have been."
"Identifying which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard is somewhat difficult at times."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
"From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business73
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing with ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it is owned by my organization, so I am not certain about the pricing and licensing details. Howe...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I believe ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's marketing strategy has to be changed because only fewer organizations, such as small and mid-scale organizations, have been using it right now. It has t...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is that it helps to prevent somebody from accessing scripts. It will allow access if it is a valid one; otherwise, we can reject it. This helps...
 

Also Known As

Targeted Attack Protection
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Brinker Capital
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Trellix, Microsoft and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP). Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.