CATO Networks vs Teridion
CATO Networks vs Teridion, compared side by side on 19 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: CATO Networks is on 74/100 and Teridion on 51/100.
Where each one leads
CATO Networks
- our overall score: 74/100 against 51/100
- agent readiness: 50/100 against 21/100
- domain rating: 76/100 against 48/100
- headcount: 1,692 against 48
- headcount growth: +36.5% against -9.6%
- funding raised: $951M against $70.0M
- LinkedIn following: 191,952 against 7,349
Teridion
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
At a glance
| Measure | CATO Networks | Teridion |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | The world's first SASE platform, converging SD-WAN, network security, and a global private backbone. | Teridion provides a global, high-performance WAN service built on the public cloud, offering fast setup and scalable bandwidth. |
| Category | SASE, SD-WAN, Network Security, Cloud Security | WAN Optimization, Cloud Networking, SD-WAN, Network as a Service |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Platform | Platform |
| Founded | 2015 | 2013 |
| Headquarters | Tel Aviv, Israel | Tel Aviv, Israel |
| Status | Inactive | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | CATO Networks | Teridion |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 1,692 | 48 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +36.5% | -9.6% |
| Total funding | $951M | $70.0M |
| Latest round | Series H | Strategic |
| Valuation | $3.0B | Not published |
| LinkedIn followers | 191,952 | 7,349 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | CATO Networks | Teridion |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 74/100 | 51/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 56/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 90/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 47/100 | 31/100 |
| Quality | 86/100 | 45/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (50/100) | F (21/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 76/100 | 48/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | CATO Networks | Teridion |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Not detected | Hetzner |
| CMS | Not detected | WordPress |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Jquery |
| Analytics | Not detected | Google Tag Manager |
| Support stack | Not detected | HubSpot |
CATO Networks vs Teridion: common questions
Which is better, CATO Networks or Teridion?
On our 0-100 score CATO Networks rates higher (74/100 against 51/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 19 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do CATO Networks and Teridion compare on the numbers?
CATO Networks leads on our overall score (74/100 against 51/100), agent readiness (50/100 against 21/100), domain rating (76/100 against 48/100), headcount (1,692 against 48), headcount growth (+36.5% against -9.6%), funding raised ($951M against $70.0M), LinkedIn following (191,952 against 7,349).
Read the full CATO Networks review and pricing or the Teridion review and pricing. You can also browse other CATO Networks alternatives we track.