We compared Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: The reviews suggest that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is commended for its simple installation process, seamless integration with Windows, and effective detection and correlation of threats. However, it may suffer from a lack of clarity in its licensing model and limitations in its user interface, security features, and customization options. On the other hand, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint may present a more challenging initial setup and higher pricing. Nevertheless, it offers advanced functionalities, robust protection against attacks, extensive integration possibilities, and a highly acclaimed EDR capability. It is noted that improvements are needed in terms of management, graphical user interface, compatibility, and technical support. Overall, both products possess their individual strengths and weaknesses.
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is its ability to bring together all the data, providing more information than just antivirus hits."
"The intelligence mechanisms are good."
"Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"Defender for Endpoint provides good visibility into threats and has favorable threat intelligence."
"The solution's threat protection is mostly AI and machine-learning based. That is the most important feature of the product. It also offers centralized management so I can remotely manage devices."
"It does not make Windows slow, as compared to all of the third part antiviruses."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint was easy."
"For Carbon Black Endpoint, the possibility of integration with different other software's log servers is the important thing. Having just one point of view is more interesting so you don't need to go to different places to see all the information."
"VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is a highly stable solution."
"Behavioral Monitoring stops known malicious events before they even begin."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"It is stable and easy to set up."
"I feel that the initial setup was straightforward and not complex."
"This product has the capability of uploading scripts to the tool and this is a very comprehensive feature."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The central console needs improvement. Both McAfee and Symantec antivirus have dashboards. These integrate with a server and work on my antivirus or some other product. However, with Microsoft Defender, you use Microsoft Group Policy Object. Defender does not provide a central console. Therefore, if you implement Defender, then maybe use another tool for the central view."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by providing more and different types of reports."
"With the XDR dashboard, when you're doing an investigation and you're drilling down to obtain further details it tends to open many different tabs that take you away from your main tabs. You can end up having 10 tabs open for one investigation. This is another area for improvement because you can end up getting lost in the multiple tabs. Therefore, the central console can be improved so that it does not take you to several different pages for each investigation."
"The dashboard customization could be improved."
"The UI for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint needs to be better. Integration with client dashboards is also lacking in this product, e.g. client dashboards shouldn't just be viewable from the cloud, because when the client's computer is offline, you won't be able to see the client dashboard."
"Phishing and Malware detection could be better."
"The price, in general, could always be a little bit cheaper."
"The solution could use improvement on the interface."
"The product's reporting capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"There could be more knowledge. I think they made a mistake when they took away the Check Point integration, because it provides more automation and also more threat intelligence."
"In my company, we face issues sometimes when there is a need to write custom rules or we want to write for some rules that are different from the standard rules provided by the solution."
"This product should be cheaper."
"What was rolled out to my company are mixed versions of Carbon Black CB Defense, so what I'd like to see in the next release is more synchronization, where it can detect the endpoint that's running an old version and suggest updates."
"Integration is difficult, but CB Defense is more powerful than others. It is difficult to implement but easy to pick up many detections."
"In the next release, it would help if we can get better control over containers."
"There's some disparity between the on-premise and the cloud type of application."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 61 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Symantec Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.