Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise vs Akamai Guardicore Segmentation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise
Ranking in Microsegmentation Software
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Ranking in Microsegmentation Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (1st), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (9th), Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Microsegmentation Software category, the mindshare of Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise is 1.4%. The mindshare of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is 27.4%, up from 23.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsegmentation Software
 

Featured Reviews

Atul-Yadav - PeerSpot reviewer
Implements real-time threat monitoring and reduces false positives with automated remediation
An area for improvement is in integrating AGentic architectures for retrieval-intensive applications in cloud infrastructures. Ensuring that Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise can work with AI agents and protect applications managed by them would be a significant enhancement. In addition, addressing the issue of the occasional hang could improve the product.
KlavsThaarup - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers micro segmentation capabilities and easy to setup
It's micro-segmentation The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature. There are always areas for improvement. It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud. So that could be improved. In future releases, I would like to see more integration with other…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The return on investment has been significant, as Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise has proved to be cost-effective."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"The tool is a complete package that offers many features like visibility. You can get a graph with real-time workflows and visibility into server-to-server communication. We get visibility into many things happening within our environment."
"I found the solution to be stable."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise hangs, requiring a process restart."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"I would rate the stability a six out of ten, where one is low and ten is high stability."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is too high."
"The price is the same as other products in the market. There's no price argument to choose one or the other product, it will cost the customer approximately the same."
"The customer would complain about the cost."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsegmentation Software solutions are best for your needs.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise?
An area for improvement is in integrating AGentic architectures for retrieval-intensive applications in cloud infrastructures. Ensuring that Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise can work with AI agents and...
What is your primary use case for Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise?
The primary use case for Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise is to implement Zero Trust security architectures for our Identity and Access Management. I use the system to verify identities and provide pro...
What advice do you have for others considering Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise?
I recommend Airgap Zero Trust Enterprise as a very good product for the Zero Trust strategy. It is particularly relevant for financial institutions, banking, insurance, and product-based companies....
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Guardicore Centra?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. I know other micro-segmentation tools like Cisco or Illumio, and so I think they are in the middle.
What do you like most about Guardicore Infection Monkey?
Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see mi...
What needs improvement with Guardicore Infection Monkey?
When we have more than one interface, we can only have one policy for both interfaces. Normally, you have assets with a production interface and a server interface that are only for management. But...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Akamai, Illumio and others in Microsegmentation Software. Updated: April 2025.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.