Bowtie Zero Trust Network Access vs Cato Networks ZTNA: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Bowtie Zero Trust Network Access

Security teams managing distributed workforces across multiple cloud regions should prioritize Bowtie Zero Trust Network Access for its refusal to backhaul traffic through centralized gateways, which eliminates the bottleneck that tanks performance in traditional ZTNA deployments. The distributed control plane runs entirely on your infrastructure, not Bowtie's, and WireGuard encryption keeps private keys out of vendor hands, addressing the NIST PR.AA identity and access control requirement without trust dependency. This isn't for buyers seeking integrated secure web gateway capabilities from a single vendor; Bowtie's on-device SWG component is functional but plays second fiddle to its network access core.

Cato Networks ZTNA

Mid-market and enterprise teams replacing legacy VPN with zero trust will prefer Cato Networks ZTNA for its cloud-native architecture that eliminates the need to manage on-premises infrastructure while enforcing identity-based access across hybrid IT. The platform covers both NIST PR.AA (identity and access control) and PR.IR (infrastructure resilience), meaning you get access policy enforcement without sacrificing visibility into whether your security perimeter actually holds under load. Skip this if your organization runs primarily on-premises and needs deep microsegmentation of internal networks; Cato shines at securing remote access to distributed resources, not re-architecting the datacenter.