We performed a comparison between Avast Business Hub and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The performance is good compared to other products that slow down the laptop, post-installation."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It's straightforward to set up."
"Avast as a product is as easy as it gets - everything is outlined and transparent in terms of licensing."
"It's not heavy on the system."
"Our favorite feature is the PC Patch Management."
"It has increased productivity. IT threats are kept at a minimum because of this product."
"The ease of deployment and the command center that they have are the most valuable. It is basically self-monitoring. It doesn't require that much tinkering after you deploy or install."
"The integration with all variations of Microsoft Defender, for Endpoint, 365, and Cloud is valuable."
"I am using it for very simple purposes. It is perfect and quite effective. I have been using it for a while, and I have never had any virus infection, data leak, or other security breaches. It works fine for standalone purposes. If you log on to OneDrive, it has ransomware protection."
"We are able to productively integrate with existing on-prem, hybrid, or cloud applications."
"Real-time detection and cloud-based delivery of detections are highly efficient."
"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."
"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."
"We have just started to implement it. It is useful for protection from malware and ransomware."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"The solution is not stable."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Detections could be improved."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The support needs improvement."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution could improve by providing more security."
"Making the price a bit cheaper would be an improvement."
"Where I have faced a challenge is on the reporting. I would like to see something that provides information regarding the next month or quarter, in terms of reporting."
"It reduces network and bandwidth speed."
"It could have a 10,000-feet overview of the whole infrastructure because the software is easily installable on the whole infrastructure and not just the infrastructure, but also the workstation themselves. I would love to have a 360 view of the whole network and basically see from where a test is coming, and if there is an instance in the cloud that is actually misbehaving or if there is a workstation that is infected and stuff like that. It can also have some kind of AI to detect all those things and then cut off the connection from that machine. In Cortex, you can link the logs, reports, and all that stuff. You can also see the full picture of when it happened, and you can trace it back all the way to a file or something else. I would like to see similar functionality in Avast Business Endpoint Protection."
"I would like to see better protection and more spyware included with the free version."
"The accuracy of the scanner could be improved."
"It should have proper and timely updates to deal with new viruses as they come onto the market."
"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."
"We encountered some misbehavior between Microsoft Office Suite and Defender. We had issues of old macros being blocked and some stuff going around the usage of Win32 APIs. There is some improvement between the Office products and Defender, and there is a bunch of stuff that you can configure in your antivirus solutions, but you have several baselines, such as security baselines for Edge, security baselines for Defender, and security baselines for MDM. You have configuration profiles as well. So, there a lot of parts where we can configure our antivirus solution, and we're getting conflicting configurations. This is the major part with which we're struggling in this solution. We are having calls and calls with Microsoft for getting rid of all configuration conflicts that we have. That's really the part that needs to be improved."
"There is a lot of information to take in, and the portals tend to change quickly due to the fast-paced nature of the industry."
"The automation could be simpler on the mitigation side. It has a learning curve. Otherwise, it's pretty easy."
"If the solution could be integrated more with Defender for Cloud, to be more unified, that would help. It is good now, but even more integration could be done with Defender for Cloud. We see two different portals. If Defender for Endpoint could be ported to the CSPM, Defender for Cloud, that would make things even easier for us."
"It can be more secure."
"With regards to the interface, a challenge I found was that there was not enough documentation on how to tune it. I had to read multiple sources on the internet to learn how to configure the tool appropriately."
"Something that is unique to Microsoft is its licensing model. When you go out and you buy McAfee or Symantec, you know what you're getting out of the box, but with Microsoft, often, when you're looking to achieve a certain set of capabilities, those capabilities are spread across different products. You might try to do something you could do with CrowdStrike, but then find out that you also need to purchase Microsoft Defender for Identity or Microsoft Defender for Azure. You realize that when they talk about what they can offer within the Microsoft platform, it's really the suite of investments. So, sometimes, you may find yourself buying Defender for Endpoint thinking that it matches CrowdStrike, but then you find that Microsoft really needs to sell you something else. One plus one will equal three, but when you have a very concise platform, such as CrowdStrike, you know what you're going to get."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avast Business Hub is ranked 52nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 12 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Avast Business Hub is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Avast Business Hub writes "Easy to scale, good reports, easy to install and has excellent support". 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". Avast Business Hub is most compared with HP Wolf Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Business, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Avast Business Hub 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.
