Enclave Networks vs Tailscale
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Enclave Networks and Tailscale.
Quick Verdict
3.5/5
Enclave Networks
0 reviews
4.1/5
Tailscale
0 reviews
Tailscale is rated higher (4.1 vs 3.5). Enclave Networks provides zero-trust connectivity for distributed teams, MSPs and infrastructure. It replaces traditional VPN with direct peer-to-peer tunnels that require no VPN server, no open firewall ports and no public IP exposure; connections fall back to Enclave-operated relays only when a direct path cannot be established. Tailscale creates a private WireGuard mesh between all your servers and devices with zero config. Works through firewalls and NAT. Free Personal plan for non-commercial use: up to 6 users with unlimited user devices.
Enclave Networks Zero-trust private networking without VPN complexity | Tailscale Zero-config WireGuard mesh VPN for your infra | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.5 (0 reviews) | 4.1 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | freemium |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free tier available |
| Best for | MSPs and IT teams connecting multi-site, multi-cloud or hybrid estates that want closed firewalls and policy-driven zero trust connectivity, with per-machine licensing that suits device fleets. | Developers and small teams running servers across multiple providers who want secure mesh connectivity without managing bastions, VPN concentrators or firewall rules |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ✓ | |
| DDoS protection | ||
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ||
| Free tier | ||
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tierapi access | free tieropen sourceapi accessteam features |
| Visit Enclave Networks → | Visit Tailscale → | |
Enclave Networks
Pros
- + Per-enrolled-system pricing is simple and predictable ($8.00/mo list, $7.33/mo annual)
- + Strong cryptographic defaults: Ed25519 certificates, per-session Curve25519 ECDHE with forward secrecy, AES256-GCM tunnels
- + No VPN concentrator, no open firewall ports, no network reconfiguration — direct peer-to-peer tunnels
- + Multi-tenant portal and subnet gateways fit MSP and multi-site operations well
- + SSO/OIDC trust requirements (Entra ID, Okta, Google, Duo, JumpCloud) gate tunnel establishment
- + Generous honesty in the docs, including a frank explanation of relay fallbacks and their cost
Cons
- - Every container and every machine counts as a paid enrolled system — costs grow with fleet size
- - Free tier is non-commercial only (5 systems); no free commercial usage
- - Relayed fallback paths traverse Enclave-operated servers with higher latency and lower throughput
- - No published uptime SLA or third-party audit report we could find
- - Small vendor (Wales, small-company filings) with a thinner ecosystem than the consumer mesh brands
Tailscale
Pros
- + Near-zero-config WireGuard mesh: devices connect peer-to-peer through NAT with no firewall surgery
- + Free forever for non-commercial use (up to 6 users, unlimited user devices)
- + Seat-based billing is predictable; invited-but-inactive users do not occupy seats
- + Full IPv6 support inside the tailnet plus IPv4/IPv6 interoperability via relays
- + Open-source clients; self-hostable control plane (Headscale) exists for the trust-constrained
Cons
- - Proprietary hosted control plane coordinates key exchange and sees network metadata
- - Not a privacy VPN — anonymous internet exit is an add-on or your own exit node
- - SLA-backed support is a paid add-on package on every plan, including Premium
- - Tagged-resource and ephemeral-minute meters can raise the bill for Kubernetes-heavy fleets
- - Seat overage auto-charges and is not refunded when seats are reduced afterwards
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.