12 Best Cisco Webex Alternatives & Competitors (2026)

Microsoft Teams combines chat, video, and deep integration with Microsoft 365. It excels in large enterprises already using Office tools and provides strong compliance certifications. Unlike Mattermost's self-hosted focus, Teams is primarily SaaS with limited on-premise options, making it less suitable for air-gapped or highly sovereign use cases where full infrastructure control is mandatory.

Google Chat integrates with Google Workspace for simple team messaging. It offers fast deployment and good mobile experience but is fully cloud-based. Organizations evaluating Mattermost alternatives often reject Google Chat when data residency and on-premise control are non-negotiable requirements.

Zoom is a widely used video conferencing platform with screen sharing, recording, and webinar tools. It offers robust mobile apps and breakout rooms but typically requires participants to install software or create accounts for full access, unlike Screenleap's instant browser viewing. Zoom excels in large meetings and enterprise security yet can feel heavier for quick one-on-one support sessions where Screenleap's no-install model shines.

Slack is a cloud-native team messaging platform popular for everyday business communication. Its strengths include polished UX, extensive app marketplace, and fast search across conversations. Compared to Mattermost, Slack offers easier setup but lacks native on-premise deployment and the same level of data sovereignty required by defense or critical infrastructure teams. Pricing follows a freemium model with paid tiers for advanced administration.

Slack is a cloud-native team messaging platform popular for everyday business communication. Its strengths include polished UX, extensive app marketplace, and fast search across conversations. Compared to Mattermost, Slack offers easier setup but lacks native on-premise deployment and the same level of data sovereignty required by defense or critical infrastructure teams. Pricing follows a freemium model with paid tiers for advanced administration.

TeamViewer provides remote desktop access and screen sharing with strong security and unattended access features. It supports cross-platform use and file transfer but often requires software installation on both ends, contrasting Screenleap's browser-only viewer experience. TeamViewer is popular for IT support while Screenleap targets lighter collaboration and demo use cases with simpler setup.

Zoho Meeting provides browser-based screen sharing integrated with Zoho's CRM and productivity suite. It supports recording and webinars but may require Zoho accounts for advanced features, unlike Screenleap's open access. Zoho Meeting benefits users already in the Zoho ecosystem needing tighter CRM ties.

AnyDesk focuses on fast remote desktop performance with low latency and easy connection codes. It offers mobile support and recording but generally needs an app or client for viewers, differing from Screenleap's zero-install browser access. AnyDesk suits technical remote work better than casual sales demos where Screenleap's speed and simplicity are prioritized.

Rocket.Chat is an open-source team chat platform that supports self-hosting and omnichannel features. It provides similar channel and integration capabilities to Mattermost with strong emphasis on customization. While both are freemium, Rocket.Chat sometimes trades depth in mission-critical playbooks and defense-specific security modules for broader omnichannel support.

Google Meet integrates screen sharing into Google's ecosystem with easy calendar links and browser-based participation. It lacks some of Screenleap's dedicated CRM export or website embedding tools but benefits from broad Google Workspace adoption. Meet is convenient for teams already using Gmail yet may require more setup than Screenleap for instant external sharing.

Zulip offers threaded conversations that help organize complex technical discussions. It is open source and can be self-hosted. Compared with Mattermost, Zulip provides superior threading but fewer native playbook and incident response tools, making it better for developer teams than for security operations centers needing structured workflows.