We compared CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, CylancePROTECT is praised for its exceptional threat detection capabilities, customer service, positive ROI, and ease of use, while users highlight the need for improvements in detection capabilities and integration. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint stands out for its comprehensive threat protection, efficient system management, and incident response capabilities, with users also satisfied with customer service and ROI. Pricing, setup, and licensing are perceived positively for both products, with room for improvement in certain areas mentioned by users.
Features: CylancePROTECT stands out for its exceptional threat detection, zero-day attack prevention, easy implementation, low system impact, and comprehensive analytics. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat protection, real-time monitoring, efficient system management, user-friendly interface, seamless integration, and incident response capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for CylancePROTECT is described as minimal, straightforward, and hassle-free, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's setup process is deemed straightforward and doesn't require much effort., The ROI from CylancePROTECT was highly positive, delivering improved security measures, increased efficiency, and reduced costs. Users praised its user-friendly interface and fast deployment. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint was seen as positive with users expressing satisfaction with its performance, effectiveness in protecting against threats, ease of use, and real-time insights.
Room for Improvement: CylancePROTECT has room for improvement in detection capabilities, integration with other security tools, reporting and analytics functionalities, and user interface. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has areas for enhancement according to user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required to establish a new tech solution varies for both CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Some users for CylancePROTECT mentioned different timeframes for deployment and setup, while for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, users also had different timeframes but emphasized the importance of context., The customer service for CylancePROTECT is praised for exceptional assistance, personalized guidance, and resolving issues promptly. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides helpful, efficient, and prompt support with effective solutions.
The summary above is based on 98 interviews we conducted recently with CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"I've found the AI engine in CylancePROTECT to be particularly effective for technology and in preventing unknown threats."
"Even if an endpoint loses connection to the Internet, I know that endpoint is protected against 99.99% of the threats in the wild today."
"Blackberry Protect offers endpoint protection. It's easy to deploy. It's scalable and stable."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"The solution runs in the background, and I do not need to care about it."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"CylancePROTECT is very stable - we've had no issues with performance and no errors or bugs."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"The best part is that it is built into Windows, whether it is a server base or a desktop base, which gives more control over the operating system. Because Defender, the operating system, and the Office solution are by Microsoft, everything is working like hand-in-glove. Its administrative overhead is less because a desktop user has already got some experience of how to handle a Microsoft Defender notification or administer it."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use the solution right out of the box without too much configuration."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is beneficial because we are using Microsoft Windows and all the core solutions are made by Microsoft, such as the authentic platform, operating system, and antivirus protection. It is a heterogeneous environment. We had to use third-party solutions before and update everything separately. For example, the policy for antivirus. With Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, when Microsoft Windows receives updates it will update with it. This is one main advantage of this solution."
"It is easy to install and use requiring little maintenance but applying updates."
"Technical support has been great."
"In terms of the installation, ease of use, and user interface, Defender has been great so far."
"Technical support is good."
"It integrates very well with all Windows workstations or other Microsoft Endpoint products. It also works quite well. So far, I have not had any issue that hasn't been sorted out. It doesn't use too many resources, so you don't have to install different things."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"Additionally, their channel management has been lacking, with a notable disregard for small and medium-sized businesses, focusing primarily on large enterprises and very large MSPs."
"The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward."
"rom my experience interacting with the primary or the central administrative console, it's quite complex. You would need a fair bit of technical experience to set it up, implement and maintain it. That would be one area for improvement."
"While you are working, you are finding these things that were supposed to be waived have come back to being blocked. That's frustrating."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"It needs real analysis of quarantined files. The EDR product isn't showing much right now."
"Work on the math model. We are catching a lot of false positives, which gets to be a pain at the start of a deployment."
"The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use."
"A single dashboard would be a significant improvement."
"Its price could be better."
"The anti-ransomware features need to be improved upon."
"The solution could always be more secure."
"There is no behavior analytics for devices and endpoints. There is no behavior-based protection."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by adding more security features."
"Integration with third-party vendors could be better. It would be better if it integrates with other protection solutions or other products outside of Microsoft. Nowadays, anti-virus protection doesn't really have to be planned as overall protection for your environment in terms of security. There are really different avenues that bad actors can take to wreak havoc on your machine."
"The onboarding and deployment could be more user-friendly, and there is room to grow in some of the reports. I don't want them to be oversimplified or overly complex, but there is room for improvement in the reporting it can do. It's relatively minor."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". CylancePROTECT is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and Fortinet FortiClient. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.