We performed a comparison between ESET Inspect and Fidelis Elevate 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."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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."
"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."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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"
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
ESET Inspect is ranked 50th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews while Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. ESET Inspect is rated 7.6, while Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ESET Inspect writes "A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". ESET Inspect is most compared with HP Wolf Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Darktrace, whereas Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and Darktrace. See our ESET Inspect vs. Fidelis Elevate report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.