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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Microsoft Defender for Clou...
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (14th), Microsoft Security Suite (11th)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Ranking in Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Application Control (6th), ZTNA as a Service (1st), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (4th), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.7%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is 6.0%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is 9.2%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps6.0%
iboss2.7%
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform9.2%
Other82.1%
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
FV
Security and Continuity Manager at Rolinco NV
Deployment has been seamless with insightful data categorization and enhanced control
The features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that I have found most valuable include the overall portal view, with bubble graphs which give us insight into what goes where in the categorization, nowadays with Generative AI but all kinds of categorization, collaboration, etc. That central view of the portal is very useful for us. The impact of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps on our organization's ability to assess and manage app related risks has been significant because we have more visibility. Therefore, we can add more control, and we have already done so. This was not possible in the old solution, in the old CASB solution with Netskope. We now can see on the spot, and we do that almost weekly, what the end users are utilizing, which cloud providers or cloud apps they're using. The visibility into OAuth apps provided by Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is very good. The visibility into risk and risk management of our organization's Generative AI apps is very nice, as you can choose the category Generative AI and then see exactly what traffic has been going to and from Generative AI in the cloud. This makes us very insightful on what is used within the company. We have some policies on blocking specific Generative AI, and we use within our company one particular AI part, which is CoPilot of Microsoft. In this way, we can see what the end users are using other than CoPilot, and that makes us more in control. The effectiveness of the integration of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps with Defender XDR and defending against SaaS attacks is very intuitive. It works immediately if we create a new policy or in Purview or in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, or when we make an app unsanctioned by blocking it, then it is almost immediately, or at least within a couple of hours, effective on all the endpoints where the EDR is running. This gives us much better control over things than before.
Zaheer_Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
Secure access has improved remote work and has reduced vulnerabilities across our workforce
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time. Some vulnerabilities create issues, and when we wanted to identify the source of the vulnerabilities, specifically focusing on mobile ID and related areas, it was unable to provide assistance. However, according to discussions with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, they said that by the end of mid-2026, they are exploring these features, and probably those features can be incorporated or embedded into this particular system. That is the only major negative point.In terms of responses, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is good. In terms of controlling vulnerability, it is good. The only cons I have noticed is that it is a bit slower, and sometimes it is unable to identify the source. These are the key areas for improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would rate the technical support of iboss a solid 10 without a shadow of a doubt."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"iboss is easy to use despite its complexity. Multiple engineers manage it, but it's significantly more straightforward to administer than traditional VPNs and web proxies."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"Defender's integration with our identity solutions is critical in our current setup."
"We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls."
"All of the features are valuable because all of the features are related."
"The favorite feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is the categorical blocking capability, which appears to be fed from Microsoft Security Intelligence feeds that seem to be better than other solutions and allows for dynamic configuration, cutting down on potential issues from manually managing block lists."
"I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with."
"The general usability of the solution is very straightforward."
"Threat detection is its key feature, and that's why we use this tool. It gives an alert if a PC is attacked or there is any kind of anomaly, such as there is a spike in sending emails or we see an unauthorized website being accessed. So, it keeps us on our toes. We get to know that there is something wrong, and we can isolate the user and find any issues with it. So, threat detection is very robust in this tool."
"The raw logs that come directly from Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps contain all the data I need, and the ability to track activities happening on cloud applications and the alerts provided is an interesting aspect."
"The Live Logs are a cool feature. We can directly identify issues and divert user traffic."
"Has a good zero trust feature."
"Yes, it is very stable. I have never seen it go down, not once."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler CASB are API integration and DLP."
"We don't need to connect anymore. It is automatically connected when you log on in Windows."
"The tool's scalability is good."
"SASE's most valuable features are proxy and content filtering."
"Subsequently, after this, there is a huge reduction, as the vulnerabilities, especially the security bugs that were coming prior to Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, were about 20,000 to 22,000 and have come down more than 40 percent, which is definitely an advantage over the previous product."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"File integrity monitoring would be very advantageous as an additional feature."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"There are challenges with detection and there are challenges with false-positive rates."
"It takes some time to scan and apply the policies when there is some sensitive information. After it applies the policies, it works, but there is a delay. This is something for which we are working with Microsoft."
"The areas of Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps that need improvement are related to IAM, as they do not provide much support for local users."
"There are certain areas where the product could improve, such as some functionalities that did not work as expected."
"This service would be better if it had a separate license, only for this service, that could be used to track usage."
"The response time could be better. It will be helpful if the alerts are even more proactive and we can see more data. Currently, the data is a little bit weak. It is not complete. I can't just see it and completely know which user or which device it is. It takes some effort and time on my part to investigate and isolate a user. It would be great if it is more user-friendly or easy for people to understand."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps' initial setup was quite technical but we were prepared. The time of the implementation depends on the job and how many users are being set up."
"It doesn't actually decrease the time to respond. This has been an issue with Microsoft recently. Sometimes, there is a delay when it comes to getting an alert policy email... Sometimes it takes two or three hours for that email to be sent."
"Another area of improvement is implementation through non-client connectors. The solution can be implemented in two ways. One uses the back file; the other one uses client connectors. So the client connector is pretty fast, but when it comes to non-client connectors and procedures, it's kind of delayed and slow."
"There could be more DLP-related features. Additionally, there needs to be flexibility for integrating ISP features."
"The pre-defined dictionaries could be improved."
"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."
"We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution."
"The solution's granularity should be improved because it has limited granular options to control, visible, allow, block, delay, and receive."
"We often face performance and latency issues with Zscaler SASE."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"Where we are right now, this is an acceptable pricing. I would like to see more transparency given to the end user. The end user given to us is via the cloud service provider. There are different programs and license models. Some include this, and some include that. It is all over the place. There can be a little more consistency or simplification in the pricing so that your parts list is not ten pages long, and you are not trying to determine, "If I have an E3, does this cover that?", or "Do I need to pay separately for the license?" Simplification would probably be better."
"We have an educational licensing agreement. It's a customer agreement for multiple years."
"It has fair pricing. You pay for what you get. As far as I know, there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fee."
"The cost could be improved when you need to pay for anything. For example, refreshing files takes time to load, though it may be my Internet. To improve the refresh time, Microsoft says that we need to pay for a Premium license, and I don't like paying for things that help make a solution better."
"The pricing is a little bit high but right now, we are okay with it because of the compatibility with Office 365, Teams, and Azure AD."
"Our clients normally use the Microsoft E1 licensing, which is renewed yearly."
"The pricing is in the middle. It isn't too cheap or expensive compared to other antivirus or security products. It is priced according to industry standards."
"It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive."
"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."
"The pricing is quite high, especially when it comes to the gateway."
"There is definitely an ROI."
"In the long run, cloud services are not inherently costly."
"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 SASE software is quite expensive compared to other solutions"
"The price is competitive."
"It's an affordable solution"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) solutions are best for your needs.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise42
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
Which is the better security solution - Cisco Umbrella or Microsoft Cloud App Security?
Cisco Umbrella is an integral component of the Cisco SASE architecture. It integrates security in a single, cloud-nat...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Cloud App Security?
At the time of implementation, when the size of our organization was small, it was a more affordable product. Since a...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Cloud App Security?
The fidelity of the signal in Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps has been a challenge in some areas. There have been i...
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 ac...
What do you like most about Zscaler SASE?
The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability.
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
MS Cloud App Security, Microsoft Cloud App Security
Zscaler SASE, Zscaler DLP, Zscaler CASB, Zscaler CSPM, Zscaler Browser Isolation, Zscaler Posture Control
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Customers for Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps include Accenture, St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and Nakilat.
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.