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

Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Pr...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
44th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (8th), Application Control (6th), ZTNA as a Service (1st), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (2nd), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is 4.0%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform4.0%
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP0.9%
Other95.1%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Cyber Security Engineer at Infratech Co
Policy management has improved data protection but configuration and encrypted traffic remain challenging
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode. Additionally, Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP cannot monitor encrypted applications such as Microsoft Teams because it is end-to-end encrypted. In terms of additional features, there are many aspects of Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP that need improvement. Right now, two or three items are necessary, such as testing every policy to make sure they are configured correctly. We cannot go directly to production due to the extensive fine-tuning required, which typically takes two to three weeks to monitor the policy after customization. A lot of time has been consumed in the two to three weeks needed, which is something that should be reduced. Additionally, concerning the predefined policies, we cannot see the backend condition or backend script, which makes it difficult to modify the predefined policy.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Team Lead - 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

"It primarily influences policy enforcement, cloud application access control, and endpoint network coverage."
"We chose Forcepoint as part of our cybersecurity strategy, and one of the key expectations was to prevent data leakage."
"The most valuable features in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP include policy management and endpoint status, as well as supplementary servers, OCR, IRR, and additional features."
"Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is purely a DLP-based solution, which makes it the best option available."
"Two great features that we really like on the solution are the Internet Access and Private Access."
"The user interface of Zscaler Private Access is excellent. With proper knowledge and expertise, one can efficiently handle intricate enterprise environments without feeling overwhelmed. This leads to exceptional productivity for managed service providers. The user experience is remarkably streamlined, enabling the management of even the most complex enterprise setups without any excessive complications."
"The customer service and support are very good."
"With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable."
"Zscaler SASE is probably the number one cloud-based proxy security solution."
"It has been helpful in maintaining our infrastructure. The granular level control it offers allows us to set application policies per application for each user."
"Zscaler CASB's latency and architecture are excellent."
"The policies are very easy to implement."
 

Cons

"From an end user's perspective, it's not always clear what's happening with the DLP. It would be beneficial to have more use cases available, perhaps on a countrywide basis."
"The deployment is a little bit difficult. It requires two to three separate servers for databases and the application."
"The SaaS solution needs improvement, especially the malware-centric part, although the CASB is better but mostly data-centric. The after-sale support could also be improved."
"In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognito mode."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
"You won't find anything that can help you with the configuration part and other areas related to the product if you search for proper or exact details of Zscaler Cloud DLP online in very easy language."
"The solution's granularity should be improved because it has limited granular options to control, visible, allow, block, delay, and receive."
"The connectivity monitoring part should be included in the core license without any extra charges."
"The scalability is a weak point right now. Its scaling capabilities are lacking, and we'd like to see that improve in the future."
"More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry."
"Having a Zscaler-specific device could streamline this process and provide a more consistent user experience across diverse branches."
"The menu for the ZIA portal could be organized a little bit differently. The most-used modules should be at the top of the menus, not somewhere near the bottom, some of them are not organized well in my opinion."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost is roughly 90 US dollars per year, per license."
"The product is a little more expensive than other tools."
"As per industry leads, Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
"Pricing for Zscaler Private Access is moderate. It's acceptable, though I can't give you the exact price currently. It's not too expensive, and on a scale of one to five, I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing."
"Zscaler Private Access is extremely expensive."
"Zscaler Private Access can be an expensive solution, depending on the license type you will purchase."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP is very costly, especially in Sri Lanka, but the compliance ROI justifies the investment.
What needs improvement with Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
In my perspective, there are several things that need to be improved in Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP, such as the inability to monitor some encrypted data or data leaking in incognit...
What is your primary use case for Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP?
I have experience with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention and Netwrix Endpoint Protector, as I am currently working with both. My experience is primarily with Forcepoint. I am mostly working with Forc...
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 access service edge (SASE) designed to deliver network security in a cloud-deliver...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zscaler Cloud Protection?
This is an area where I have candid feedback from our organization regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Overall, I would assess the pricing as a si...
What needs improvement with Zscaler Cloud Protection?
After three years of working with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, I do have genuine feedback on areas where I feel there is room for improvement. The initial configuration complexity is one a...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint Risk Adaptive Protection for DLP vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.