BBT.live

Name: BBT.live
Brand: BBT.live

AI Native

Software-Defined Networks & Secure Connectivity for Service Providers, Delivered as a Service

Est 2020|8 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 762|Website|FTEs 7|HQ Tel Aviv - Yafo, Tel-Aviv District, IL

MarketsSecurity Service Edge (SSE)Enterprise Networking

01Competitive Landscape

| Aspect | BBT.live (BeBroadband® as a Service) | Cato Networks (Cato SASE Cloud) | Fortinet (Secure SD-WAN) | |--------|---------------|----------------|----------------| | Starting Price | Not publicly listed | Not consistently public; often quote-based (some third-party pricing pages exist but are not authoritative) | Hardware + subscription via partners; ordering guides focus on SKUs and capabilities more than list price | | Best For | Service providers wanting a white-box / hardware-agnostic, multi-tenant “secure connectivity subscription” for SMB/SME | Orgs seeking a single-vendor SASE with large market visibility and broad PoP-driven architecture | Orgs already standardized on FortiGate/Fortinet security stack, wanting integrated SD-WAN + security | | Key Strength | Hardware/connection agnostic narrative; service-provider multi-tenant orchestration; partner-embedded security (Check Point) | Strong market presence; positioned as a leader in SASE platform messaging; single-vendor story | Mature firewall heritage; broad appliance lineup; widely deployed in mid-market | | Key Weakness | Limited public proof via mainstream review platforms; unclear public compliance posture; unclear pricing | Can be costly; vendor lock-in concerns; PoP fit varies by geography | Licensing complexity; performance depends on sizing; can become complex at scale | - Sources (competitor references used) - Cato Networks site: https://www.catonetworks.com/ - Fortinet ordering guide (capabilities/SKUs): https://www.fortinet.com/content/dam/fortinet/assets/data-sheets/og-secure-sdwan.pdf - Narrative analysis - Where BBT.live plausibly differentiates - The go-to-market is explicitly **service-provider-oriented** (B2B2B), with emphasis on multi-tenancy and a bundled subscription designed to reduce provider CapEx. - Hardware agnosticism/white-box is framed as a core value, appealing to providers wanting supply-chain flexibility. - Sources: https://bbt.live/ , https://bbt.live/model/ - Where larger competitors may excel - Independent validation, broad third-party review coverage, and mature compliance programs. - Global PoP footprint and deep SSE feature depth (varies by vendor). - Market adoption signals - BBT.live has partner announcements and conference participation (e.g., VivaTech selection press releases), but lacks the visible “review gravity” of incumbents. - Source: https://www.webull.com/news/12886780288295936

01Competitive Landscape

Aspect	BBT.live (BeBroadband® as a Service)	Cato Networks (Cato SASE Cloud)	Fortinet (Secure SD-WAN)
Starting Price	Not publicly listed	Not consistently public; often quote-based (some third-party pricing pages exist but are not authoritative)	Hardware + subscription via partners; ordering guides focus on SKUs and capabilities more than list price
Best For	Service providers wanting a white-box / hardware-agnostic, multi-tenant “secure connectivity subscription” for SMB/SME	Orgs seeking a single-vendor SASE with large market visibility and broad PoP-driven architecture	Orgs already standardized on FortiGate/Fortinet security stack, wanting integrated SD-WAN + security
Key Strength	Hardware/connection agnostic narrative; service-provider multi-tenant orchestration; partner-embedded security (Check Point)	Strong market presence; positioned as a leader in SASE platform messaging; single-vendor story	Mature firewall heritage; broad appliance lineup; widely deployed in mid-market
Key Weakness	Limited public proof via mainstream review platforms; unclear public compliance posture; unclear pricing	Can be costly; vendor lock-in concerns; PoP fit varies by geography	Licensing complexity; performance depends on sizing; can become complex at scale

Sources (competitor references used)
- Cato Networks site: https://www.catonetworks.com/
- Fortinet ordering guide (capabilities/SKUs): https://www.fortinet.com/content/dam/fortinet/assets/data-sheets/og-secure-sdwan.pdf
Narrative analysis
- Where BBT.live plausibly differentiates
  - The go-to-market is explicitly service-provider-oriented (B2B2B), with emphasis on multi-tenancy and a bundled subscription designed to reduce provider CapEx.
  - Hardware agnosticism/white-box is framed as a core value, appealing to providers wanting supply-chain flexibility.
  - Sources: https://bbt.live/ , https://bbt.live/model/
- Where larger competitors may excel
  - Independent validation, broad third-party review coverage, and mature compliance programs.
  - Global PoP footprint and deep SSE feature depth (varies by vendor).
- Market adoption signals
  - BBT.live has partner announcements and conference participation (e.g., VivaTech selection press releases), but lacks the visible “review gravity” of incumbents.
  - Source: https://www.webull.com/news/12886780288295936

Aspect

BBT.live (BeBroadband® as a Service)

Cato Networks (Cato SASE Cloud)

Fortinet (Secure SD-WAN)

Starting Price

Not publicly listed

Not consistently public; often quote-based (some third-party pricing pages exist but are not authoritative)

Hardware + subscription via partners; ordering guides focus on SKUs and capabilities more than list price

Best For

Service providers wanting a white-box / hardware-agnostic, multi-tenant “secure connectivity subscription” for SMB/SME

Orgs seeking a single-vendor SASE with large market visibility and broad PoP-driven architecture

Orgs already standardized on FortiGate/Fortinet security stack, wanting integrated SD-WAN + security

Key Strength

Hardware/connection agnostic narrative; service-provider multi-tenant orchestration; partner-embedded security (Check Point)

Strong market presence; positioned as a leader in SASE platform messaging; single-vendor story

Mature firewall heritage; broad appliance lineup; widely deployed in mid-market

Key Weakness

Limited public proof via mainstream review platforms; unclear public compliance posture; unclear pricing

Can be costly; vendor lock-in concerns; PoP fit varies by geography

Licensing complexity; performance depends on sizing; can become complex at scale