Enclave Networks vs Twingate
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Enclave Networks and Twingate.
Quick Verdict
3.5/5
Enclave Networks
0 reviews
4.0/5
Twingate
0 reviews
Twingate is rated higher (4.0 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. Fast TLS-based tunnels with SSO integration — Twingate does not use WireGuard.
Enclave Networks Zero-trust private networking without VPN complexity | Twingate Zero trust network access — replaces VPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.5 (0 reviews) | 4.0 (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. | Engineering teams replacing a corporate VPN with per-resource zero trust access, managed as code |
| 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 tierteam featuresssomobile app |
| Visit Enclave Networks → | Visit Twingate → | |
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
Twingate
Pros
- + Genuinely free Starter tier for up to 5 users — not a trial, with 50 Resources and 10 networks
- + Outbound-only connectors: no open inbound ports, no bastion hosts, no published IPs to scan
- + Policy depth: device posture, WebAuthn MFA, SCIM, just-in-time and usage-based access
- + Public component-level status page, documented relay redundancy, published incident write-ups
- + Terraform, Pulumi, Helm and Docker deployment paths — access managed as code
Cons
- - SaaS control plane holds your access policy — disqualifying for fully self-hosted mandates
- - Not an internet VPN; per-resource model requires disciplined resource inventory
- - Geoblocking, static IPs and privileged access are Enterprise-only; DNS filtering is an add-on
- - Per-seat pricing scales linearly and gets expensive with many contractors or seasonal staff
- - Contractual SLAs are custom/Enterprise-only; the 99.99% figure is a reliability claim, not an SLA
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.