We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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: Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is commended for its extensive cross-platform protection, user-friendly interface, and compatibility with third-party software. Users praised Symantec Endpoint Security for its regular virus signature updates and comprehensive administrator's console. Kaspersky users requested improvements in security and stability. They also want better documentation, faster malware scanning, enhanced encryption, and improved remote management. Reviewers said Symantec Endpoint Security could improve its graphical interface, Linux support, and scanning capabilities.
Service and Support: Users say that Kaspersky’s support is helpful and responsive, whether it comes from resellers, partners, or the vendor. Some users said Symantec customer service was helpful but slow, while others have expressed general dissatisfaction with support.
Ease of Deployment: Some reported that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is straightforward to setup, while others find it more complex and time-consuming. 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: Users gave mixed feedback on the price of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. Some found it reasonable while others thought it was expensive. 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: Our reviewers said that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has proven to be a solid investment. Symantec Endpoint Security demonstrates strong stability and incident prevention, leading to reduced downtime. It offers a favorable return on investment.
"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."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business's most valuable feature is the ease of management."
"The signature update is done securely."
"Endpoint Security is efficient and easy to use. It doesn't slow the performance of your personal computer."
"The interface is friendly."
"I like the security that this solution provides."
"The product is quite scalable."
"It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider."
"It helps to improve our security for our mobile and VMware infrastructure. The remote tasks are great."
"It is very easy to managing everything in relation to the implementation and processing. The initial setup is very easy."
"Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is a stable solution."
"One of the features is the ability to frequently get virus signature updates."
"Scalability."
"It seems to be user-friendly. Our users seem to like it for the most part."
"Some of the most valuable features were antivirus, malware, and spyware. They were really good."
"With Symantec, I always know this tool will be reliable and with the latest protection."
"It's a robust product."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"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 should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The installation is technical. You need to be certified."
"It slows down the system sometimes, and it has the occasional false positive where it deems something a virus when it isn't."
"There were issues with the cloud management."
"This product could be improved by integration with Linux. The one limitation this product has is that it's not compatible with and doesn't offer protection for Linux servers. It could also be easier to configure."
"Areas for improvement include signature update management and selecting the respective features on the endpoint side."
"The company needs to keep developing more security measures to help keep its customers safe. If they could keep adding to security features, it would be ideal."
"It would be preferable if the product were more proactive and more modern in its approach to security and protection."
"They're restricted to endpoint protection for now, I'd like to see some additional products."
"Sometimes tech support is a bit slow to find a solution."
"The technical support could improve because when you reach level one support there is a lot of delays."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see more to do with malware, encryption technology, and controlling mobile devices."
"There is no local support for Symantec products in Hong Kong."
"The solution already has support for Windows, Mac, and Linux but it could improve by having better support for Linux. We have run into some problems when there are upgrades. If they can improve this point, Symantec would be good for endpoint protection as well as for a critical server."
"It's not cheap."
"The solution could be more secure and scalable."
"The technical support could be a bit better."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Micro Apex One, 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 Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.