ESET PROTECT
7.9/10
MSP Compared score
- Starting price
- Custom quote
- Reviews
- 4.6/5 (~800 G2 reviews)
- Free trial
- 30 days
- Deployment
- Cloud + on-prem
- Best for
- Teams wanting lightweight, reliable endpoint protection
Best Endpoint Security & EDR Software · 2026
ESET PROTECT vs 
ThreatLocker ESET PROTECT vs ThreatLocker: on our data-weighted scoring, ThreatLocker edges ahead (8.2 vs 7.9/10). ESET PROTECT starts at Custom quote and is best for teams wanting lightweight, reliable endpoint protection; ThreatLocker starts at Custom quote and is best for MSPs wanting Zero Trust allowlisting and ringfencing. Choose ThreatLocker for the stronger overall track record; consider ESET PROTECT if its pricing model or fit matches your environment better. Side-by-side table below.
Affiliate disclosure: Some links may be affiliate or partner links. If you sign up through one, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. This never changes our scores or rankings. Learn more.
ThreatLocker
8.2/10
MSP Compared score
- Starting price
- Custom quote
- Reviews
- 4.8/5 (~250 G2 reviews)
- Free trial
- 30 days
- Deployment
- Cloud
- Best for
- MSPs wanting Zero Trust allowlisting and ringfencing
Strengths at a glance
Six criteria, each scored 0–10 on the same scale from real review data, public pricing and feature coverage. See our methodology →
| Criterion | ESET PROTECT | ThreatLocker |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial | 7.9 | 8.2 |
| User reviews | 9.2 | 9.6 |
| Adoption | 7.7 | 6.4 |
| Affordability | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Feature breadth | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Ease of trial | 6.0 | 6.0 |
ESET PROTECT vs ThreatLocker: head-to-head
| ESET PROTECT | ThreatLocker | |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | Custom quote | Custom quote |
| Pricing model | per device | quote |
| Free trial / tier | 30 days | 30 days |
| Best for | Teams wanting lightweight, reliable endpoint protection | MSPs wanting Zero Trust allowlisting and ringfencing |
| Deployment | Cloud + on-prem | Cloud |
| G2 rating | 4.6/5 (800) | 4.8/5 (250) |
| Capterra rating | — | — |
| Our score | 7.9 | 8.2 |
Choose ESET PROTECT if…
You need teams wanting lightweight, reliable endpoint protection.
✓ Pros
- Very light agent
- Reliable detection
- Flexible deployment
✕ Cons
- EDR is higher tier
- Quote pricing
- Smaller US channel
Choose ThreatLocker if…
You need msps wanting zero trust allowlisting and ringfencing.
✓ Pros
- Powerful Zero Trust controls
- Excellent support
- Strong MSP fit
✕ Cons
- Allowlisting requires ongoing tuning
- Quote pricing
- Different model than AV/EDR
In depth
In Depth
Pricing
| Aspect | ThreatLocker | ESET PROTECT |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Custom quote | Per-device |
| Free Trial | 30 days | 30 days |
| Transparency | Low (quote-based) | Low (per-device pricing not listed) |
Both solutions require direct contact for pricing, but ESET’s per-device model is more straightforward than ThreatLocker’s custom quotes. ThreatLocker’s approach reflects its specialized nature as a Zero Trust allowlisting platform rather than traditional endpoint protection.
Features & Deployment
ThreatLocker is cloud-only and purpose-built around Zero Trust principles:
- Application allowlisting and ringfencing form the core
- Storage and elevation controls add granular access governance
- 24/7 “Cyber Hero” support is table-stakes
ESET PROTECT spans cloud and on-premises with traditional endpoint security DNA:
- Lightweight AV engine prioritizes minimal resource overhead
- EDR capabilities (Inspect) available as a higher tier
- Full-disk encryption and flexible deployment options
The philosophies diverge sharply: ThreatLocker denies by default (allowlisting), while ESET detects threats (AV/EDR). ThreatLocker demands ongoing policy tuning; ESET requires less operational overhead but offers less granular control.
Ratings & Community
| Platform | Score | Reviews |
|---|---|---|
| ThreatLocker (G2) | 4.8 | 250 |
| ESET PROTECT (G2) | 4.6 | 800 |
ThreatLocker’s higher score reflects strong MSP satisfaction and focused use cases. ESET’s larger review count signals broader adoption, though slightly lower marks suggest mixed enterprise experiences, likely tied to EDR limitations at lower tiers.
Verdict
Choose ThreatLocker if you’re an MSP seeking Zero Trust ringfencing and application control, and can stomach custom pricing and continuous allowlist maintenance.
Choose ESET PROTECT if you want lightweight, no-nonsense endpoint protection with encryption and hybrid deployment flexibility, and traditional AV/EDR suffices for your threat model.
ThreatLocker is the specialist; ESET is the reliable generalist. Our edge: ThreatLocker (8.2 vs 7.9) for security posture, but ESET wins on simplicity and cost predictability.
Frequently asked questions
- ESET PROTECT vs ThreatLocker: which is better?
- ESET PROTECT vs ThreatLocker: on our data-weighted scoring, ThreatLocker edges ahead (8.2 vs 7.9/10). ESET PROTECT starts at Custom quote and is best for teams wanting lightweight, reliable endpoint protection; ThreatLocker starts at Custom quote and is best for MSPs wanting Zero Trust allowlisting and ringfencing.
- Is ESET PROTECT cheaper than ThreatLocker?
- ESET PROTECT starts at Custom quote and ThreatLocker starts at Custom quote (see the pricing rows for models and limits).
Data as of September 17, 2026. Sources: eset.com, threatlocker.com. Figures are pulled from public vendor and security data and refreshed automatically.