Comparisec
← Data Loss PreventionCode42 Incydr
AdequateStrongStrongAdequate
4.5

Vendors › Data Loss Prevention › Code42 Incydr

Code42 Incydr logo

Code42 Incydr

Code42 (Mimecast)

Founded 2001·US·Private
4.5

Combined score

G2
4.576
Gartner
4.558

▪ Editorial verdict

Code42 Incydr approaches DLP from a genuinely different angle, tracking file movement and exfiltration behaviour directly rather than scanning content against classification rules, meaning detection does not depend on completing extensive data classification work first. This behavioural approach has made Incydr particularly strong for departing employee investigation, where security and legal teams need detailed forensic timelines of exactly what data a leaving employee accessed or transferred before exit.

The honest scope limitation is that channel coverage concentrates on endpoint, cloud, and email rather than the widest content-based data protection surface, and compliance framework mapping trails Forcepoint or Symantec.

The verdict: right for organisations whose primary DLP driver is insider risk and departing employee investigation. Organisations needing the broadest compliance mapping should evaluate Forcepoint or Microsoft Purview DLP instead.

Last reviewed: September 2026

G2

4.576 reviews

Gartner

4.558 reviews

PeerSpot

8.235 reviews
Gartner MQ: Not in MQ

Data Loss Prevention assessment

PROTECTIONAdequate
Channel coverage
3 / 5
Content inspection
4 / 5
OPERATIONSStrong
Policy management
4 / 5
Deployment ease
4 / 5
ANALYTICSStrong
Incident forensics
5 / 5
TRUST & ECOSYSTEMAdequate
Compliance alignment
3 / 5

Strongest: Incident forensics

Watch out for: Compliance alignment

Strengths & limitations

Strengths

●The strongest insider risk investigation capability in this comparison, purpose built for departing employee data theft investigations
●A fundamentally different detection approach tracking exfiltration behaviour rather than requiring upfront data classification taxonomy work
●Faster time to value than traditional content-inspection DLP since policy setup does not depend on first classifying sensitive data

Watch out for

●Channel coverage is more focused than traditional enterprise DLP, concentrating on endpoint, cloud, and email
●Compliance framework mapping for specific regulatory content requirements is less comprehensive than Forcepoint or Symantec DLP
●The 2024 Mimecast acquisition introduces integration and roadmap questions worth asking directly

Best for

Organisations whose primary DLP driver is insider risk and departing employee data theft investigation.

Not suitable for: Organisations needing the broadest possible channel coverage and content-based compliance mapping.

Compliance coverage

●Essential Eight
●AU Privacy Act
●SOC 2
●GDPR
●ISO 27001
○HIPAA
○NIST CSF
○PCI-DSS
○CMMC
○NIS2
○DORA
○CIS Benchmarks

Switching intelligence

Switching from

Common migration paths based on review data

  • Content-inspection DLP without insider risk focus
  • Manual offboarding review

Also considering

Vendors typically shortlisted alongside

← Back to Data Loss PreventionCompare with other Data Loss Prevention vendors ➲

Quick facts

Pricing modelPer user, annual
Pricing rangeQuote-based, mid-market to enterprise
Free trialYes - 14 days
Min seatsNo minimum
Deployment time1-2 weeks
Complexity2 / 5
Pricing transparency2 / 5
AU presenceYes
IRAP assessedNo
Open sourceProprietary

Deployment

ModelsSaaS
OS supportWindows, macOS, Linux
CloudAWS, Azure, GCP
SupportEmail, Chat, Dedicated CSM
Data residencyUS, EU, AU

Company

Code42 (Mimecast)

Founded 2001 · 500-1000 employees · Private

HQ: US

Not publicly disclosed

Certifications

SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001

Integrations

OktaCrowdStrikeSlackMimecast Email Security