We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security 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."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security has a lot of telemetry that allows me to really see what's going on with the device."
"I find Bitdefender to be very light. When we were using the other versions, users would complain that they would make the computers slow. But since we have deployed Bitdefender, we haven't had that."
"Protection is the most valuable feature."
"The installation is easy and it takes approximately a few hours. We are deploying it from a Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) tool. All you need to do is click on it and the installation is complete."
"The cloud console is good and the tool is effective in protection."
"We find the protection the solution provides valuable."
"When it comes to the web, according to our customers, this product stands out due to its superior performance compared to others."
"It is very easy to configure and deploy."
"The most valuable aspect is information, specifically the automatic investigation of packages."
"We had Norton Antivirus before, and with Norton, we didn't have a way to centrally manage a lot of features. Defender allowed us to deploy it from our Office 365 admin console. That is probably the biggest thing that made us go with Defender."
"The detection features are valuable, as is the fact that it is easier to port these logs into Sentinel. That is also useful for us. It is more comprehensive."
"Endpoint's most valuable feature is deep analysis."
"Defender for Endpoint provides good visibility into threats and has favorable threat intelligence."
"I like the real-time protection features. Windows Defender will detect if there's a threat like a Trojan or something like that but Kaspersky lets it run normally."
"One of the features which differentiates it from other EDR providers is the Automated Investigation and Response, which reduces the workload of SOC analysts or engineers. They don't have to manually investigate each and every alert on the endpoint, since it does so automatically. And you can automate the investigation part."
"It automatically detects intrusion and malware."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"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."
"Detections could be improved."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The firewall capabilities could benefit from an upgrade since it lacks a high level of granularity and control."
"Potential areas for improvement could be more accessible and immediate support for critical situations, especially considering the regulatory challenges in healthcare."
"They've got all this training that's available, but it involves stuff that doesn't really encompass the solution as a whole."
"Machines with low memory and CPU may experience slow performance."
"There are compatibility concerns as Bitdefender does not support Windows 7."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"The risk management tool does not have reporting, which I feel to be a huge mistake."
"My main concern is that it's a bit heavy for some devices. Like Kaspersky or McAfee, it uses more RAM or memory. Similar to that, it causes issues for users and their own resources, similar to that. If you deploy on old legacy devices with only 1GB of RAM, then it could be a problem."
"The documentation could be better. When they update their manuals, sometimes they refer to products by their old names, so it is a little confusing. For example, the documentation might still say "Advanced Threat Protection" instead of Defender for Endpoint."
"We would like more customization."
"The solution can be more user-friendly."
"There are some areas in the proactive threats that are just overwhelming the SOC, so we've had to turn those off until we can figure out how to filter out the false positives."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint does not offer default templates for alerts, requiring us to configure everything ourselves to avoid numerous false positives."
"From an audit point of view, our auditors would like to have more reports on how things are used, if things go wrong, and how they went wrong. For example, if something got a warning, "Why?" So, we would like more versatility for tracing and reporting. That would improve the product, as long as the user interface doesn't get bogged down."
"The solution has minimal customization options, especially compared to Mandiant, so we want to see more scope for customization. A single portal for customization would also be a welcome addition."
"In the next release, I would like to see better management reporting."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 28th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". 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". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with HP Wolf Security, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Seqrite Endpoint Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security 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.