We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users praised Symantec Endpoint Security for its regular virus signature updates and comprehensive administrator's console. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures. Reviewers said Symantec Endpoint Security could improve its graphical interface, Linux support, and scanning capabilities.
Service and Support: Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness. Some users said Symantec customer service was helpful but slow, while others have expressed general dissatisfaction with support.
Ease of Deployment: Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation. Some users said Symantec Endpoint Security was easy to set up, while others struggled with the installation. Deployment time varies depending on the customer’s environment.
Pricing: Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale. The cost of Symantec Endpoint Security depends on the licensing terms and necessary security components. While some users find the price acceptable, others believe it could be more affordable.
ROI: Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment. Symantec Endpoint Security demonstrates strong stability and incident prevention, leading to reduced downtime. It offers a favorable return on investment.
"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."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The stability is very good."
"The initial setup is simple."
"One of the best use cases involves synchronized security staff, which allows us to manage both the firewall and the anti-virus features from the cloud."
"It is one of the best in terms of technicality."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Intercept X is a web filtering and URL sanity checks. Overall the solution is well balanced with all its features."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"This solution offers very good performance and it has great features."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"SEP, the entire suite of components, provides good endpoint protection."
"The IPS function (with no firewall needed to be installed in the SEP client) is quite good."
"Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is a stable solution."
"I like the intrusion prevention and Sonar features."
"Symantec ATP provides quite a good overview of how threats have spread within the company."
"Endpoint protection has improved our operations by protecting our servers from potential cyber threats."
"The most valuable feature is the virus and malware detection capability."
"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."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"It should offer better security updates."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
"They don't have the full stack of offerings as compared to the other competitive products that we see."
"Intercept X needs more reporting and device management features, so I can get messages from PCs that let me know if I need to do something with them."
"The solution is expensive, and it could be made cheaper."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"I would like to have a built-in firewall, rather than having to integrate one."
"We are not able to merge the sub-estates. If we create multiple sub-states and there may be instances where a user is in a different sub-state, it may not be possible for us to relocate that user from one sub-state to another through the console. We have to merge them manually which is not ideal."
"Multi-domain policy options for exceptions and global blocks."
"Is not a full anti-ransomware solution."
"SONAR could be improved. The false/positive rate is a little high."
"It can maybe send notifications when there is an update and everything is successful."
"They are lacking the visibility that you get in a heuristical, next-generation AI product."
"We are not satisfied with this solution. It needs a lot of improvements. It doesn't detect the most recent malware and unknown threats. With most of the users working from home these days, there is also a need for some extra security layer. That's why we are thinking of going for a better solution that will take care of all of our endpoints and work from home situation. Symantec also has to work on EDI technology. Vendors like Palo Alto and Cisco are coming with their own intelligence and cloud infrastructure in which unknown threats are regularly watched and monitored, and they are reported to the admin."
"The monitoring capabilities could be further developed."
"The support can be wanting. Sometimes the time to resolution is longer than I would expect."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Wazuh, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security 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.
Having used both I'd go with something other than either of these two solutions.
Both deep dive onto your local computers making them impossible to remove, Should the need arise you'll end up having to reimage equipment to fully remove the products. Bloated and they dig their hands into everything on the local machines.
If these are your only two choices, then go with Sophos as it's a MUCH better product.
If you refer to the MITRE Attack analysis, BitDefender is the best, in terms of 100% accuracy and the most number of detections, for the second consecutive year.
@Udhayakumar Murugan,
First, I don't know the budget of yours (which is important) and if you have a budget then you must choose two different vendors to protect you.
And you must have a hardware firewall - it's your first protection layer and you can choose Sophos firewall + Kaspersky endpoint or FortiGate firewall + Sophos endpoint.
My advice to you: FortiGate firewall and Kaspersky endpoint.