While adoption of SASE is accelerating across all sectors due to a variety of reasons, their approach to solve their clients’ network architecture is not the same across the aisle. Some vendors like Fortinet and Cisco have evolved from security and networking backgrounds, while vendors like Cato Networks began as pure SASE vendors. This background is critical in influencing customers’ choice between consolidation with one provider and composing a stack from several. There is a rising trend towards opting for a single vendor rather than compiling a stack through procurements from various vendors. Let us see what factors are influencing this decision.
Vendors with security-first and SASE native background tend to be regarded as single vendor “one platform” options. This is because these vendors already converge many security controls behind one policy plane. Buyers who prioritize reducing tool sprawl, unifying policy, and simplifying operations often find these security/SASE native platforms a more credible single vendor bet than going for multiple point products and knitting them together.
Networking heritage providers (telcos, SDWAN vendors) are also promoted as single vendor options when they can bundle connectivity, SDWAN CPE, and at least basic SSE into one commercial relationship. Customers driven mainly by WAN refresh, global transport, and managed services frequently adopt such players as their primary SASE partner, even if some advanced security is supplemented elsewhere.
Kaushik Vijay Venkatesh, Principal Analyst, Enterprise Networking, QKS Group, explains, “Single-vendor SASE always sounds interesting, with a single source of Truth, seamless operations, and faster feature rollouts, with clear tracking of ROI, and resilient data sovereignty. These are all the key terms that always enthuse networking personnel, which drives the trend forward, and vendors are focusing on it the most. With the recent implementation of Agentic AI and AI-driven workflows for closed-loop automation, Single-vendor SASE is going to be a key factor to drive simplicity and security.”
This differentiation is an important part in enterprises deciding on whether to opt for a single or multi-vendor procurement. Enterprises that feel that a vendor whose offering is balanced enough across both domains tend to consolidate on that provider; when the imbalance is too great, they compensate with tools from other providers. This matters significantly in single-vendor SASE adoption trends, as it shapes product completeness, buyer trust, and how well the offering fits enterprise priorities and legacy environments. It is also important in the current uncertainty, which witnesses CFOs pushing for consolidation. CISOs tired of finding the weak link during an outage, and CTOs wanting a unified upgrade experience, and most importantly, predictable costs. Single-vendor deployment can reduce existing costs by 40-50% through fewer point products and streamlined integration, as per Fortinet. AI is another critical factor powering the shift towards single-party procurement. Multi-vendor architectures inherently fragment data, limiting the value of AI engines. AI thrives in consolidated ecosystems.
However, this strategy also has its pros and cons, as listed in the table below.
| Aspect | Pros | Cons |
| Operations | One portal, One IDEs, one policy engine, and a single support path simplify daily operations. | Tightly coupled stack can reduce flexibility for networking and security teams to evolve independently. |
| Deployment speed | Less design and integration work enables faster rollout. | Migration during initial deployment and moving away from the platform later can be slower and more disruptive. |
| Cost/TCO | Consolidation reduces overlapping tools and can unlock better volume discounts. | If pricing shifts unfavorably, the consolidated spend becomes a single large cost center. |
| Feature coverage | Broad coverage across SDWAN and SSE in a unified offering. Additionally, faster feature rollouts. | Some functions may be only “good enough” compared with best‑of‑breed point products. |
| Vendor risk | Clear accountability with one “throat to choke” for performance and security incidents. | Higher vendor lock‑in and dependence on a single roadmap and cloud fabric. |
Vendor landscape:
| Company | SASE offering (high‑level components) | Typical deployment fit (single‑ / managed‑ / multi‑vendor) |
| Palo Alto Networks | Prisma SASE: cloud SWG, ZTNA, CASB, FWaaS, SD‑WAN, threat prevention, integrated with NGFW/Cortex. | Often primary single‑vendor platform; also used in multi‑vendor when customers pair another SD‑WAN or carrier. |
| Fortinet | FortiSASE / Unified SASE: SWG, ZTNA, CASB, FWaaS, DLP, SD‑WAN, tied to Fortinet Security Fabric. | Strong single‑vendor choice; widely consumed as single‑vendor managed via MSSPs and carriers. |
| Zscaler | Zero Trust Exchange with SASE use cases: cloud SWG, ZTNA, CASB, DLP, FWaaS; integrates with third‑party SD‑WAN. | Common in multi‑vendor designs as SSE with separate SD‑WAN; sometimes de‑facto single‑vendor for user access. |
| Netskope | Netskope One / SASE: NG‑SWG, CASB, ZTNA, DLP, FWaaS plus “Borderless SD‑WAN”. | Frequently single‑vendor for security‑led SASE; also used as SSE in multi‑vendor stacks. |
| Cato Networks | Cato SASE Cloud: global private backbone with integrated SD‑WAN, SWG, CASB, FWaaS, ZTNA, DEM. | Designed as single‑vendor SASE; also delivered as single‑vendor managed by partners/MSPs. |
| Versa Networks | Versa SASE: converged SD‑WAN, NGFW, SWG, ZTNA, CASB, analytics on one software platform. | Used as single‑vendor or single‑vendor managed; can also underpin carrier‑led offers in multi‑vendor setups. |
| Cisco | Cisco SASE: SD‑WAN (Viptela/Meraki) plus Umbrella/SSE, Zero Trust, firewall services. | Popular in multi‑vendor (SD‑WAN + third‑party SSE) and single‑vendor managed via service providers. |
| Aryaka | Aryaka Unified SASE: WAN‑as‑a‑service with built‑in security stack (SWG, FWaaS, ZTNA) on global POPs. | Typically, single‑vendor managed SASE for WAN‑led transformations; can coexist in multi‑vendor security environments. |
| Perimeter 81 / Check Point Harmony SASE | Cloud‑delivered SASE: ZTNA, SWG, FWaaS, DNS security, VPN replacement; now part of Check Point portfolio. | Often adopted as single‑vendor SASE for mid‑market; also offered as single‑vendor managed by MSPs. |
| Managed SASE providers (Tata Communications, Infosys, Wipro, Hughes, etc.) | Do not build SASE stack themselves; wrap SD‑WAN plus one or more SSE vendors into a managed service. | Primarily single‑vendor managed from the customer view, but internally may be multi‑vendor (Versa, Zscaler, Palo Alto, Fortinet, Netskope, etc.) |
Today, we are witnessing an increasing number of enterprises shifting towards single-source SASE deployment. This shift is happening not because marketing finally convinced them, but because the underlying economics, threat landscape, and operational failures of fragmented ecosystems have converged into a perfect inflection point.