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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform vs Twingate comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust End...
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
4th
Ranking in ZTNA
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (6th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (7th), Application Control (1st), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Twingate
Ranking in Network Access Control (NAC)
12th
Ranking in ZTNA
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (12th), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (15th), ZTNA as a Service (15th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Access Control (NAC) category, the mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Twingate is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Access Control (NAC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform1.4%
Twingate0.9%
Other97.7%
Network Access Control (NAC)
 

Featured Reviews

Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.
Joey Benamy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cyber Liability Engineer at OncoLens
Helps reduce access-related support tickets, is quick to deploy, and streamlines onboarding
We were able to add Twingate into our infrastructure without having to change our infrastructure or how people work. We reaped the benefits of Twingate immediately because it replaced an alternative solution with a lot of overhead. Twingate helped reduce access-related support tickets by 80 percent. Twingate streamlines onboarding for our company, especially for the engineering team, by automating resource access through directory integrations. New employees generally require no manual configuration within Twingate, saving us significant time and effort. The resiliency is directly proportional to the level of control we exert over its components. We can manage Twingate connectors to support high availability, ensuring the system is as reliable as needed. This flexibility and control enhance Twingate's resiliency capabilities significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Being able to protect and trust nothing by default, known as zero trust, is the most important feature to me."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped our company save on operational costs and expenses significantly."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs and expenses."
"The time saved from dealing with ransomware nonsense is invaluable."
"The solution has made knowing and managing what is running on our clients' devices much easier for us. We know they cannot run what they are not supposed to run."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"Overall, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a ten out of ten."
"ThreatLocker's VDI environment, coupled with the ringfencing capabilities of policies, gives us confidence."
"I appreciate Twingate's developer-first approach, particularly its excellent developer tools for deployment and management."
 

Cons

"I took off one point because sometimes it can be a bit complicated for new engineers, such as my teammates, especially for those who don't have hands-on experience."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform should focus more on the application allow listing feature, which shows whether a program has been recognized but not necessarily whether it has been trusted."
"I think ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved with an identity and multi-factor authentication module so that it can help manage situations when you elevate a command prompt to run as an administrator by incorporating its own MFA into that process."
"The biggest thing I would like to see improved in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is reporting."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"The reporting could be improved."
"Identifying areas of improvement is challenging, however, perhaps adding a few more built-ins could help."
"I find that the learning mode is too accessible. Technicians sometimes default to it instead of manually building policy controls."
"Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"ThreatLocker's pricing seems justifiable."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"I can't complain. Cheaper would always be nice, but I think it's reasonable compared to other software in the cybersecurity market."
"Twingate's pricing is fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Access Control (NAC) solutions are best for your needs.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
19%
Financial Services Firm
8%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business49
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise8
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Pricing, setup costs, and licensing have been pretty accessible and manageable. It was not too expensive to get started, especially at a small scale for a smaller MSP. It is very accessible, easy t...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Going with the theme of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform being a one-stop shop where they have just about everything, and they have a really good product stack as is. However, t...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
We're a managed service provider, mostly dealing with small business office environments, so ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is used in the context of many different tools. It'...
What needs improvement with Twingate?
Twingate's lack of native support for Windows Server is a significant limitation. While it hasn't directly affected my company, I've encountered this issue when assisting others. Additionally, the ...
 

Also Known As

Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Blend, Modern Health, Webflow, Liberis, Cerebral, Homebase, Bloomreach, Cameo, Hippo and Bitpanda
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Network Access Control (NAC). Updated: February 2026.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.