We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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 stability is very good."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Cisco has definitely improved our organization a lot. In terms of business, our company feels safer. We actually switched from legacy signature-based solutions to threat intelligence-based and machine learning-based solutions, which is Cisco Secure. This has improved our security significantly, from 10% of signature-based technology security to 99.9% of the current one which we are running. We were happy."
"The product provides sandboxing options like file reputation and file analysis."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"It used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"I rate the initial setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"Doesn't consume resources or affect the computer performance at all."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"Its ease of installation is valuable. It has been a low-resource tool and the continuous updates in the past have made it attractive from the standpoint of the trust level on the protection."
"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 solution is not user-friendly."
"The solution is not stable."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"Its price is okay for us, but it can always be better. There's always room for improvement when it comes to pricing."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"The technical support is very slow."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"The only complaint I have with Webroot is its inability to prevent UoD phishing and its inability to check against bots or block anti-attacks. Plus the URL server is in zero-definition."
"I believe that Webroot Business Endpoint Protection should offer a more modern UI."
"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."
"The solution could improve by providing better ransomware protection."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"We need more control over when upgrades to the app are rolled out."
"It would be great if there was a feature which would allow you to scan an individual file on an endpoint user's computer."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 35th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Makes it possible to see a threat once and block it across all endpoints and your entire security platform". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, HP Wolf Security and Panda Adaptive Defense 360. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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.