Zscaler vs Cato ZTNA: what IT teams need to know before they commit

VPNs are losing ground to zero trust network access fast. More than half of organizations experienced at least one attack tied to VPN vulnerabilities in the past year, according to a survey of 632 IT and security professionals by Cybersecurity Insiders.

The reason is straightforward. VPNs authenticate a user once and then grant broad network access. If credentials get compromised, attackers move laterally across systems with little resistance. For organizations running hybrid workforces, cloud applications, and multi-site operations, that model creates too much exposure.

ZTNA takes the opposite approach by verifying identity, device posture, and context for every access request, then connecting users directly to specific applications rather than to the network itself. Unauthorized users never see the applications, and lateral movement is blocked by design.

Two platforms consistently appear on enterprise shortlists: Zscaler and Cato Networks. Both replace legacy VPNs and enforce identity-first access controls, but they take fundamentally different architectural approaches, and those differences shape everything from deployment complexity to long-term cost.

How Zscaler delivers ZTNA

Zscaler delivers ZTNA through Zscaler Private Access, one component of a broader security service edge platform. The other major component is Zscaler Internet Access, which handles secure web gateway, CASB, and internet-bound traffic inspection. These are separate products that work together but are managed through different consoles.

ZPA is built around a proxy-based, brokered connection model. Users never touch the corporate network. Lightweight App Connectors are deployed inside data centers or cloud environments where applications live, establishing outbound-only connections to the Zscaler cloud, so no inbound firewall rules are needed and application infrastructure stays invisible to the public internet. When a user requests access, the cloud brokers a one-to-one connection through a per-app microtunnel.

Agentless access

Browser-based access for unmanaged and BYOD devices without a client install, a strong option for contractor and third-party scenarios.

Device posture depth

Integrates with endpoint detection tools and can evaluate registry keys, running processes, and file presence, not just OS version and antivirus status.

Digital experience monitoring

ZDX monitors the full path from endpoint to application. It is a paid add-on, but provides deeper telemetry than most built-in alternatives.

Zscaler’s approach is modular by design. Organizations can adopt ZPA for private app access without committing to ZIA or the full platform, which is useful for teams that want to layer ZTNA on top of existing infrastructure rather than replacing it all at once.

How Cato delivers ZTNA

Cato delivers ZTNA as part of a unified SASE platform where networking and security are built into the same codebase from the ground up. There is no separate product for ZTNA, SD-WAN, firewall, SWG, CASB, or DLP. Everything runs through a single cloud-native architecture and is managed from a single console.

Users authenticate through SSO and MFA, and the Cato broker evaluates identity, device posture, location, and risk context before granting access to specific applications. By default, nothing is visible or accessible until a policy explicitly permits it. The key difference is what surrounds ZTNA: policies share the same engine as firewall rules, web filtering, and data protection.

Universal ZTNA

The same zero trust policies apply to all users in all locations, eliminating the split policy model organizations deal with when running separate remote access and on-site security tools.

Enterprise Browser

A browser-based access option for BYOD and contractor access launched in April 2026, included under the existing UZTNA license.

Built-in DEM

Native digital experience monitoring at no additional cost, covering endpoint health, network performance, and application responsiveness.

Private backbone

Traffic routes across a global network of 80+ points of presence connected by SLA-backed private links, a networking advantage ZTNA-only platforms do not provide.

Where the two differ

Both deliver identity-based, least-privilege access to applications. The differences show up in how they are built, how they are managed, and what they cost over time.

Architecture and delivery model

Zscaler takes a modular approach, with ZPA and ZIA each operating as their own product with their own console. That flexibility means adopting ZTNA independently, but achieving full SASE functionality requires integrating multiple components. Cato converges everything onto one platform with a single policy engine, which simplifies operations but means buying into a broader platform even when only ZTNA is needed to start.

Device posture and access controls

Zscaler offers more granular endpoint compliance checks, evaluating registry keys, running processes, file presence, and custom posture profiles built on scripts. Cato covers the fundamentals well: OS version, patch status, antivirus, disk encryption, firewall state, device certificates, and geographic location, checked continuously rather than just at login. Zscaler has the edge for complex compliance requirements; Cato is strong enough for most environments with fewer moving parts.

Management and operations

Zscaler manages ZPA and ZIA through separate admin portals. For large security teams with specialized roles, that separation can be an advantage. For smaller IT teams managing both functions, it adds overhead. Cato runs everything through a single console where changes propagate globally without syncing across products.

Licensing and total cost

Zscaler uses modular per-user pricing, which allows starting small but scales up as capabilities are layered in. Cato uses a single-SKU model bundling ZTNA, security services, and DEM into one license, producing a more predictable cost structure though the per-user price may appear higher upfront. The important number is total cost of ownership across all the capabilities you actually need.

Side by side

How to choose

Both platforms are capable. The right choice depends less on feature checklists and more on how your organization is structured, what you already have in place, and what you are trying to consolidate. Three questions get you most of the way there.

Are you replacing just VPN, or rethinking the whole stack?

If the goal is to retire VPN without touching the rest of your infrastructure, ZPA layers in cleanly on top of existing SD-WAN, firewall, and security tools. If you are already planning to consolidate SD-WAN, firewall, SWG, CASB, and ZTNA, Cato eliminates the need to integrate separate products.

How large is the team managing this?

Large security teams with dedicated roles for endpoint, network, and application security often prefer Zscaler’s depth and modularity. Lean IT teams that handle networking and security together tend to operate faster on Cato’s single console.

What does your current vendor landscape look like?

If you are running Cisco, Juniper, or another SD-WAN vendor and plan to keep that investment, Zscaler complements it. If the operational overhead of multiple point products is the problem you are trying to solve, Cato’s converged model addresses it directly.

There is no wrong answer between these two platforms. The wrong answer is choosing based on a feature comparison alone without mapping the decision to your team, your infrastructure, and the operational model you actually want to run. The best way to validate either option is to run a proof of concept in your own environment: test policy creation, break something on purpose, call support, and see how each platform handles real operational scenarios.

If Cato is on your shortlist, Momentum can help you move faster. Momentum is one of Cato’s most experienced global implementation partners, handling architecture design, policy configuration, rollout, and ongoing operations.