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

Intercept X Endpoint vs Menlo Secure 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

Intercept X Endpoint
Ranking in ZTNA
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (9th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (8th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (10th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
Menlo Secure
Ranking in ZTNA
27th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (31st), Firewalls (51st), Cloud Security Remediation (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the ZTNA category, the mindshare of Intercept X Endpoint is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA
 

Featured Reviews

Khandokar Rabbi - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for endpoint security, ransomware protection, virus protection, and server security
Intercept X Endpoint is deployed on the cloud in our organization. Previously, we had two ransomware attacks when we were using Kaspersky as an endpoint security. We didn't face any ransomware attacks after using Intercept X Endpoint for endpoint security. Intercept X Endpoint has simplified our malware detection. Since we have already implemented the policies in the cloud, all the malware is automatically detected. The solution also detects and removes new malware that can also come from the cloud AI engine. Integrating Intercept X Endpoint with our current security infrastructure was very easy. In my opinion, Sophos is a better solution because we are using Sophos endpoint security and network security. These two things sync with each other and monitor the packets and network traffic. No other vendor has simultaneous devices to check everything. I would recommend the solution to other users. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Olivier DALOY - PeerSpot reviewer
Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues
The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The package we use also comes with spam filtering features, which are quite useful."
"The initial setup is simple."
"Offers artificial intelligence, security metrics and a lot of information gathered to make decisions."
"It is very easy to set up and easy to use. It is also not resource-intensive."
"Anti-virus captures malicious threats and an aggressive next generation firewall."
"Sophos Intercept X is a complete endpoint solution."
"Intercept X's smart prevention it's very good as so are its machine learning capabilities for troubleshooting channels and files."
"The stability on offer is fine."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
 

Cons

"In terms of the site-to-site VPN elements, they tend to concentrate. It's quite simple when there are Meraki devices at both ends of the VPN but if there is another user at one end, on another device, it can be a bit tricky. So they could really simplify that process a bit."
"We are not able to merge the sub-estates. If we create multiple sub-states and there may be instances where a user is in a different sub-state, it may not be possible for us to relocate that user from one sub-state to another through the console. We have to merge them manually which is not ideal."
"Intercept X Endpoint is a very heavy solution that consumes a lot of RAM and should be made lighter."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
"I would like the solution to have more functions and to be more user-friendly."
"As for improvement, more notifications or emails about what to watch out for globally would be nice. For instance, information about the spread of a current phishing campaign or ransomware would be very helpful. I find that I have to dig in the back to find out what is happening on the global scene for things to be aware of."
"This product does not handle USB drives well."
"From the management side, we receive detailed information. Sophos has many features, such as Threat Hunting but that comes with the XDR version of the solution. There's Sophos Intercept X and then there's Sophos Intercept X with XDR technology. We bought the XDR and then now the MTR, Managed Threat Response version available too. They have different packages for clients which gives them different options to pick from. If Sophos could combine more features into one package it would be beneficial."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of this solution is a little high compared to competitors because they do not have a proper pricing structure."
"Its cost is good."
"Licensing is based on the number of users. They give a discount for editors who are considered as important members. From what I know, Sophos products are not expensive. If you have a license extension, you just need to contact the editor or partner to change the mode of licensing or extend the license to cover more people."
"The cost of Sophos Intercept X is reasonable."
"It was fairly and reasonably priced."
"The pricing is actually quite reasonable."
"The price of this product should be reduced because it is a little high."
"As I am not responsible for paying the bills I cannot comment on the pricing."
"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."
"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Crodwstrike Falcon compare with Sophos Intercept X?
I like that Crowdstrike Falcon allows me to easily correlate data between my firewalls. Its detection and machine learning are very valuable features. Crowdstrike Falcon also successfully prevents ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Intercept X?
I would describe it as economical, but not much cheaper than other solutions.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Sophos Intercept X
Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Flexible Systems
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Intercept X Endpoint vs. Menlo Secure and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.