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

Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox vs Mimecast Email Security 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

Microsoft Purview Customer ...
Ranking in Office 365 Protection
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Mimecast Email Security
Ranking in Office 365 Protection
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Office 365 Protection category, the mindshare of Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox is 2.1%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mimecast Email Security is 17.6%, up from 9.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Office 365 Protection
 

Featured Reviews

Mayeen Uddin - PeerSpot reviewer
Dashboard functionality and data processing offer value with an easy setup
We are using Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox for email access The most important feature is data processing. I like the dashboard and the undo or multi-call feature of Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox. The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective. It feels expensive for individual…
Frank Rawson - PeerSpot reviewer
It gives clients peace of mind and helps them educate their users about threats
A few years ago, our team found the implementation to be somewhat challenging. It has gotten easier as we've grown more experienced. The difficulty depends on the expertise of the person doing it. I don't work with Mimecast every day, so it might be more difficult for me than it is for one of my techs who regularly does Mimecast implementations. It requires some specific in-depth product knowledge and an understanding of email solutions. The deployment time varies. In South Africa, it depends on who you use to deploy it. If you use one of Mimecast's local partners, it can take up to two weeks because of their process. However, it's only about four to eight hours of work. After deployment, there isn't much maintenance aside from supporting and educating your customers. Users require constant education on how to use the Mimecast client and release an email that has been blocked.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important feature is data processing."
"The initial setup is easy."
"What I like about the integration is that it is directly into Microsoft 365, users can use their Microsoft 365 credentials to log into the portal and access their mail."
"Due to our specialized use case, that HIPAA dictionary really comes in handy."
"Mimecast certainly helped my customers reduce phishing emails."
"I recommend Mimecast based on customer requirements and budget."
"The product is good. To date, we have not faced any challenges."
"The solution's performance is good."
"The integration is straightforward."
 

Cons

"The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective."
"The solution is very expensive."
"External security features need improvement."
"The installation is not so straightforward."
"The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling."
"I'd like to have better support from the product in the future."
"The solution is complex and not easy to use."
"The product's interface could be improved to be more user-friendly."
"The attachment scanning feature doesn't work properly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product has good pricing in terms of return on investment."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The solution is expensive."
"We pay monthly fees to our provider."
"The product price is moderate. I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"I'm always going to say the price needs to be lower, but it's reasonable."
"It is a bit expensive."
"Compared to the other products in the market, it is neither cheap but nor very expensive. I would rate it somewhere in the middle, 5 out of 10."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Office 365 Protection solutions are best for your needs.
842,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox?
The pricing for personal users is not cost-effective. It feels expensive for individual expenses.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox?
We are using Microsoft Purview Customer Lockbox for email access.
What do you like most about Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection?
The interface of this solution is very easy to navigate and user-friendly. There is no delivery in email and other communications, making it reliable. The configuration is relatively easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection?
The pricing is higher for Mimecast, particularly for the Indian market, where it is considered expensive.
What needs improvement with Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection?
There is nothing that notably stands out in need of improvement at present.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Mimecast Email Security with Targeted Threat Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Azizi Developments, Affinity Credit Union, Aftercare, Al Abbar Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Sophos, Proofpoint, Barracuda Networks and others in Office 365 Protection. Updated: February 2025.
842,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.