VPNs have been the standard remote access solution for businesses for over two decades. Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) is increasingly positioned as the modern replacement. Marketing from security vendors makes this sound like VPNs are obsolete.
They are not, for most small and medium businesses. But ZTNA does solve specific problems that traditional VPNs handle poorly. Here is a clear breakdown of what each does and when each is the right tool.
What a traditional VPN does
A VPN creates an encrypted tunnel between a remote device and a private network. Once connected, the user has access to resources on that network, subject to whatever firewall rules are in place.
This works well when your resources are on a private network: on-premises servers, file shares, internal applications that are not internet-accessible. The VPN tunnel is the mechanism that makes those resources reachable from outside the office.
The problems with traditional VPN architecture include:
Implicit trust after authentication. Once a user connects to the VPN, they typically have broad access to the network segment they connect to. If their device is compromised, the attacker has the same access.
Performance. Routing all traffic through a central VPN concentrator creates a bottleneck. For users accessing SaaS applications (Office 365, Salesforce, Google Workspace), backhauling traffic through an office VPN gateway adds unnecessary latency.
Scalability. VPN infrastructure is designed for known, managed devices connecting to a known, managed network. As more employees use personal devices and access more cloud-based resources, VPN management complexity increases.
What Zero Trust Network Access does differently
ZTNA replaces the “trust once authenticated” model with “verify every request, every time.” Instead of granting broad network access, ZTNA grants access to specific applications, and only after verifying the user’s identity, device health, and context at the time of each request.
Key differences in practice:
Per-application access. A user authenticated for the company CRM cannot access the internal file server unless explicitly permitted. Lateral movement (a common attack pattern) is much harder.
Device health checks. ZTNA solutions check whether the device has an up-to-date operating system, active antivirus, and disk encryption before granting access, at every connection.
Works well with cloud. Because ZTNA does not backhaul traffic through a central gateway, cloud application access is faster. The policy enforcement happens at the edge, close to the user.
Popular ZTNA solutions include Cloudflare Access, Tailscale, Zscaler Private Access, and Cisco Duo. NordVPN’s business product NordLayer has added ZTNA capabilities alongside its VPN infrastructure.
Want to compare all VPNs side by side? Check our full VPN comparison table with scores across 18 criteria.
The honest comparison
| Factor | Traditional VPN | ZTNA |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | On-premises resources | Cloud-first organizations |
| Security model | Trust after login | Continuous verification |
| Performance (SaaS apps) | Slower (backhauling) | Faster (direct routing) |
| Implementation complexity | Moderate | Higher |
| Cost | Lower | Higher |
| Suitable for hybrid setups | Yes | Yes, but complex |
| Good for <20 person teams | Yes | Generally not yet |
When a VPN is still the right answer
If your team accesses on-premises resources regularly, such as file servers, internal databases, proprietary software on local hardware, a VPN is simpler, cheaper, and adequate.
If you have fewer than 20 employees, ZTNA’s management overhead (configuring per-application policies, device management, identity integration) exceeds its benefits over a well-configured VPN.
If your team is not cloud-native (not all in Google Workspace or Microsoft 365, not using purely SaaS tools), the backhauling problem that ZTNA solves is less significant.
For most small businesses in 2026, a VPN is still the appropriate tool. NordLayer (NordVPN’s business product) at around $7 per user per month covers the remote access needs of most teams without the operational complexity of ZTNA.
When ZTNA makes more sense
If your organization is cloud-first with no on-premises resources, ZTNA is the more appropriate architecture. There is no private network to tunnel into; everything is already on the internet, just with access controls.
If you have compliance requirements around device posture verification (healthcare, finance, government contracting), ZTNA’s built-in device health checks are significantly easier to audit and document than VPN-based approaches.
If you have experienced a VPN-related breach (VPN concentrator compromise is a documented attack vector, used in the SolarWinds campaign and others), ZTNA’s reduced blast radius from lateral movement is a meaningful improvement.
The hybrid approach
Many organizations in 2026 use both. VPN for accessing the handful of remaining on-premises resources, ZTNA for cloud application access. This adds complexity but avoids forcing either tool into a use case it handles poorly.
Tailscale is worth mentioning here: it is a mesh VPN that creates secure connections between specific devices without a central gateway, combining some of ZTNA’s per-device access model with VPN-level simplicity. It is popular among developers and small technical teams.
ZTNA is not a VPN replacement for most small businesses in 2026. It solves real problems (lateral movement risk, cloud performance, device posture) that become acute at scale or in cloud-native organizations. For businesses with on-premises resources and fewer than 50 employees, a well-managed business VPN like NordLayer is simpler, cheaper, and adequate. Revisit the trade-off as you grow.
Keep reading: Best VPN for Small Business in 2026 and VPN for Remote Desktop (RDP): Setup and Best Picks in 2026.