We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"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 console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 integration with our hypervisor is quite smooth, especially within the Kaspersky Enterprise environment. We have many virtual machines, and the integration is helpful."
"It's scalable enough for us."
"Provides web and DNS protection over https."
"I like the tool’s response to malware and trojans."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is a stable solution."
"The product is very easy to use."
"Encryption is the most valuable feature. It creates an encryption tunnel from your location to the delivery address."
"Has some great features not available elsewhere."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"The most important feature is the way it monitors the threats and blocks them. About 10 days ago, we were implementing SOC for a particular client. The SOC was not yet implemented, but they had Microsoft Defender. That organization was hit by some ransomware, but the hacker could not succeed. Because of the EDR, the hacker could not install the hacking tools. They were trying to do that, but Microsoft Defender completely blocked that. The hacker could log into the system, but they could not install anything."
"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."
"This solution definitely increases our security posture. When you are reviewing your existing fleet or endpoints and based on the configuration that you put out of your Defender for Endpoint, you then receive a security score from Microsoft. Depending on what rules you have configured, what policies you have deployed, and what attack surface reduction rules that you have set up and deployed, it is almost gamifying information security in the sense that you are always trying to achieve a higher score. The more hardening you perform on your endpoints, the better score you receive. This generally tends to give you a better peace of mind, but also makes you secure at the same time."
"The best feature is the fact that for certain mobiles you can control your corporate profiles versus your personal profiles. That is amazingly important. Apple just supported the separation of corporate and personal profiles, whereas Android has been doing that for quite some time... Because Android supports that, if an Android phone is lost or stolen, I can wipe out all the corporate-related information from that phone and not touch the personal side. I can separate the apps and I can separate the ability to cut and paste between apps."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"The most important and the most relevant features of Defender for Endpoint are the malware and ransomware protection."
"There are a couple of features, such as isolating the devices or connecting the device and connecting live response."
"Defender for Endpoint has one dashboard with security-related information, vulnerability-related information, and basic recommendations from Microsoft, all in different tabs. That's helpful because if we want to fix only the recommended ones, we can go fix all of them..."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"There are some cases that take three days to deal with. It's too long."
"My opinion is that behavior detection could work better. This feature gets a high rate of false positives."
"It consumes many system resources."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response should continue to improve its protection while adapting to the changing threat ecosystems. Having more advanced features would be a benefit."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution could always be more secure."
"There are some issues with EDR's web policy blocking sites that are marked as exceptions."
"We would like to have better strategic information."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
"A challenge is that it is not a multi-tenant solution. Microsoft's tenant is a licensed tenant. I'm an MSSP. So, I have multiple customers. In Microsoft's world, that means that I can't just buy an E5 license and give that out to all my customers. That won't work because all of the customer data resides within a single tenant in Microsoft's world. Other products—such as SentinelOne, Palo Alto Cortex, CrowdStrike, et cetera—are multi-tenant. So, I can have it at the top of the pyramid for my analyst to look into it and see all the customers, but each customer's data is separate. If the customer wants to look at what we see, they would only see their data, whereas in the Microsoft world, if I've got multiple customers connected to the same Microsoft tenant, they would see everybody else's data, which is a privacy problem in Europe. It is not possible to share the data, and it is a breach of privacy."
"I would like the solution to be able to prevent unauthorized programs from installing and to block unauthorised URLs which is similar to web filtering product."
"Monitoring can always be better, onboarding can be a little bit faster, log collection could be easier, they could streamline the dashboard. They could maybe split it up into different workspaces and have the ability to segment groups a little bit more."
"Microsoft should improve support for third-party platforms, because not all functionality is available for all of them. It's a good product, but they should just extend the functionality for all platforms."
"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."
"It would be helpful if they included XDR features, on top of the EDR functionality."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is not as robust, and you cannot customize it much, so that's a challenge."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should have more transparency. In the latest edition of Windows, Windows 11, it is a compulsory requirement to connect to a Microsoft account, which in turn has implications for Defender. This should be removed."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Cynet, IBM Security QRadar, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
