We compared CylancePROTECT and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: After reviewing both CylancePROTECT and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, it is clear that CylancePROTECT stands out for its easy deployment, accurate threat detection, and powerful machine-learning capabilities. However, it does receive criticism for its pricing, lack of user-friendliness, and inadequate support. On the other hand, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business offers a user-friendly interface, efficient management, and strong overall performance. Areas of improvement for Kaspersky include pricing, deployment efficiency, and support. Despite mixed reviews on pricing and support for both products, CylancePROTECT places a greater emphasis on AI-based threat detection, while Kaspersky prioritizes user-friendliness and control.
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The stability is very good."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"I like the AI and mathematical components that they use."
"It actively monitors the behavior and activity of processes and will, without hesitation, terminate at root anything it determines to be suspect."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions."
"Two or three years ago when the WannaCry virus struck, the people that were on Cylance were the ones that weren't affected."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating."
"The most functional item that we use is the process to turn off the false flags that it causes."
"The policies are easy to make and controlled by the Kaspersky Administrative Security Center, which comes at no additional costs."
"The initial setup was extremely straightforward and very easy."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is a cost-effective solution."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security protects against viruses and dangerous software, and it's also great because it has a component that is useful for the deployment of software versions to the end user's computer."
"There is plenty of features that make the solution work very well."
"The signature update is done securely."
"It has many features, like deploying a package to many clients, an MDM solution, etc."
"The solution is very easy to use. It's an extremely user-friendly product."
"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."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"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 support needs improvement."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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 implement AI in the product."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions. This is the industrial environment where you have a control center for all the automation that's happening, whether it is oil, gas, or chemical manufacturing. They often have to set up a computer at the back and watch the other stuff to get alerts. In these autonomous or on-premises environments, they often don't have access to email readily. Integration with other industrial solutions, such as HMIS, will allow them to communicate and get an alert that something has been found. This way, they can react to it sooner than having somebody watch the screen and keep checking the screen. Rockwell has its own suite. Similarly, Honeywell has its own suite. There's also an independent HMI/historian solution provider out there called VTSCADA. We actually get asked if we can get it to show up on a screen, which is difficult. Getting those alerts to work within an industrial environment would be a huge plus."
"The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information."
"CylancePROTECT's dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"I would like to see them fix the alerting system so that the endpoint reporting is a bit more streamlined."
"If they can add more features on top of their Persona feature that would be ideal."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"The product offers support only through mail and not on the phone."
"The performance level could be better."
"I'd like to see them improve encryption and remote management in the future. Kaspersky could also improve its scanning technology. Other solutions have adopted machine learning and deep learning, but Kaspersky still uses signature-based scanning."
"The solution sometimes slows down the computers of our clients, the performance needs to improve."
"I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"It needs more computer resources. They should have more anti-spam features."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business doesn't have a built-in DLP (data loss prevention) solution."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.