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

Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs Citrix Secure Private Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 2, 2025

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

Check Point Harmony SASE (f...
Ranking in ZTNA
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Firewalls (17th), Anti-Malware Tools (7th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (7th), ZTNA as a Service (5th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (6th)
Citrix Secure Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA
18th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) is 4.7%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Citrix Secure Private Access is 1.7%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer8099174 - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure access with an intuitive design and straightforward controls
In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity. Additionally, expanding integration options with a broader range of third-party tools would be beneficial for seamless compatibility with various existing systems. As for additional features in the next release, it would be great to see advanced threat detection and response capabilities integrated into the platform. This would further enhance security by proactively identifying and mitigating potential threats. Additionally, improved mobile device management features and more comprehensive user behavior analytics would be valuable additions to meet evolving cybersecurity needs.
CS
Makes it convenient to work from home, supports everything I need, and is easy to use
When everybody is trying to log in and work sometimes there is a little latency but not a whole lot. This latency also depends on the type of server you have, how may users are logging in and users' home connection (WIFI or Ethernet). If the weather is bad, sometimes, you can get disconnected. I log in every day and I don't usually have any issues unless it is really storming out and then it can be latent. When we go to print, we have to go through secure print. The secure printing kind of takes a while. It is a little latent.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I rate the overall product as ten out of ten."
"The features are excellent, particularly the user interface and user accessibility."
"The solution offers ATP features and management features."
"The installation is very easy."
"While the higher cost and complexity may pose challenges for smaller companies without extensive IT resources, the value provided by Check Point's advanced capabilities and excellent 24/7 support justifies the investment. Overall, it is highly recommended that insurance firms prioritize data security and regulatory compliance, especially medium to large companies with the resources to manage and fully utilize its features."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"The reports give a simple overview of the traffic pattern within the organization."
"The solution offers both client and clientless versions for good remote access."
"Virtual desktops and virtual apps are most valuable."
"It is easy and simple, and it has got an easy interface. It is not hard to learn. With just three clicks, you log in, and you're there."
 

Cons

"I have found that the log-in/out process takes quite some time."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."
"In the future, maybe P81 can improve the network traffic balancing and redundancy."
"The solution's speed of upload and download is an area where it lacks"
"Harmony lacks this ability when anything more than a vanilla access policy is used (we use layers and source user objects in our policy which make this impossible according to Check Point)."
"The integration from a management perspective could be improved so that the management can, from an existing Check Point firewall, manage a Harmony firewall through one pane of glass."
"The connectivity issue can be improved as at times it lags when connecting to their server."
"Regarding the support, the schedules can be improved since they are generally in another geographical area, and it is difficult to solve the problems with the time differences between them and us."
"INGPU for engineering software is an area of improvement."
"When we go to print, we have to go through secure print. The secure printing kind of takes a while. It is a little latent."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing model may not be suitable for smaller companies, as they might find it expensive. Larger companies tend to receive more value due to many users."
"The product is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The product's pricing model accommodates diverse needs and deployment sizes."
"Overall I am very happy with the solution’s flexibility and pricing."
"The cost of the solution's licenses depends on the particular use cases."
"The pricing of Check Point is relatively high when compared to other competitors like Palo Alto and Fortinet. While Palo Alto may be on the higher side in terms of cost, Check Point's pricing is similar to that of Fortinet. In some cases, Check Point offers better value for the features it provides. We initially considered other options but ultimately decided to purchase hardware that came with three years of iOS. This approach eliminated the need for any additional costs associated with Check Point. I would rate it 10 out of 10."
"I consider the product to be a medium-priced solution. There are no additional costs attached to the tool."
"Perimeter 81 charges separately for gateways and VPN connectivity, but compared to Azure, it seemed more reasonable."
"There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. They should provide better licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Government
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Perimeter 81?
Even after restarting, it tries to quickly reestablish connection which is very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Perimeter 81?
It's essential to consider the organization's specific requirements and budget. Here are some general recommendations: * Evaluate your needs * Understand pricing models * Request a quote * Compare ...
What needs improvement with Perimeter 81?
In terms of improvement, Perimeter 81 could enhance its reporting and analytics capabilities to provide more detailed insights into network activity. Additionally, expanding integration options wit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point Quantum SASE
Citrix Secure Workspace Access, Citrix Access Control, Citrix Secure Internet Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aqua Security, Cognito, Multipoint, Kustomer, Postman, Meredith
The Messenger
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) vs. Citrix Secure Private Access and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.