Check Point Mobile

Name: Check Point Mobile
Brand: Check Point Software Technologies
Rating: 4.5 (367 reviews)

Leader

Customers rely on Lakera for real-time security that doesn’t slow down their GenAI applications.

Est 1993|Valuation $14.1B|Raised $1.8B

LinkedIn 11K|Website|Web traffic 2.0M|FTEs 6,825|HQ San Francisco, CA

MarketsEndpoint Security (EPP/EDR)

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- Harmony Mobile versus Zimperium/Lookout: Selection often depends on conditional access and UEM remediation workflow behavior in the buyer's environment, detection efficacy across app/network/phishing vectors, and the privacy model for BYOD devices. - Mobile Access versus SASE/ZTNA alternatives: If the strategic direction is towards reducing VPN usage and adopting ZTNA/SASE, those alternatives may be more aligned with business and network architecture goals. For organizations already operating Check Point gateways, Mobile Access can be operationally simpler to integrate with existing firewall policy models.

Market signals / adoption

Check Point documents multiple ecosystem integrations (Samsung Knox, Microsoft Intune, Workspace ONE) on its technology partners pages.
Press releases and partnership announcements indicate ongoing channel activity and integration initiatives.

	Check Point Harmony Mobile	Zimperium MTD	Lookout Mobile Endpoint Security
Starting Price	Published per-user/per-year pricing available from the vendor and partner/reseller listings; actual pricing varies by channel and contract	Generally quoted per user/device with custom enterprise pricing; reseller listings may surface published per-device pricing examples	Enterprise pricing is typically quote-based; public list prices are uncommon
Primary use case	Organizations seeking MTD integrated with Check Point ecosystem and UEM/MDM integrations	Organizations prioritizing a dedicated MTD vendor with emphasis on on-device detection	Organizations seeking a broader mobile security portfolio with data-centric protections
Key Strengths	Integration with UEM/MDM ecosystems; presence in independent benchmark reports (buyers should validate methodology)	Focus on on-device detection and MTD-specific capabilities	Broad mobile security functionality and enterprise integrations
Key Weaknesses	Admin workflow friction reported in community (Intune/compliance event handling); variable support experiences reported	Potential false positives and BYOD privacy concerns reported in some reviews	Detailed independent efficacy evidence may require direct evaluation and testing

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Harmony Mobile versus Zimperium/Lookout: Selection often depends on conditional access and UEM remediation workflow behavior in the buyer's environment, detection efficacy across app/network/phishing vectors, and the privacy model for BYOD devices.
Mobile Access versus SASE/ZTNA alternatives: If the strategic direction is towards reducing VPN usage and adopting ZTNA/SASE, those alternatives may be more aligned with business and network architecture goals. For organizations already operating Check Point gateways, Mobile Access can be operationally simpler to integrate with existing firewall policy models.

Market signals / adoption

Check Point documents multiple ecosystem integrations (Samsung Knox, Microsoft Intune, Workspace ONE) on its technology partners pages.
Press releases and partnership announcements indicate ongoing channel activity and integration initiatives.

	Check Point Harmony Mobile	Zimperium MTD	Lookout Mobile Endpoint Security
Starting Price	Published per-user/per-year pricing available from the vendor and partner/reseller listings; actual pricing varies by channel and contract	Generally quoted per user/device with custom enterprise pricing; reseller listings may surface published per-device pricing examples	Enterprise pricing is typically quote-based; public list prices are uncommon
Primary use case	Organizations seeking MTD integrated with Check Point ecosystem and UEM/MDM integrations	Organizations prioritizing a dedicated MTD vendor with emphasis on on-device detection	Organizations seeking a broader mobile security portfolio with data-centric protections
Key Strengths	Integration with UEM/MDM ecosystems; presence in independent benchmark reports (buyers should validate methodology)	Focus on on-device detection and MTD-specific capabilities	Broad mobile security functionality and enterprise integrations
Key Weaknesses	Admin workflow friction reported in community (Intune/compliance event handling); variable support experiences reported	Potential false positives and BYOD privacy concerns reported in some reviews	Detailed independent efficacy evidence may require direct evaluation and testing