We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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."The stability is very good."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"It required very little ongoing maintenance once setup."
"Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details."
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"The solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"It is a very advanced system based on AI. It has a very large database of places or sites on the internet where you should not go. It is continuously online."
"I like that Defender is integrated and doesn't have a third-party payload trying to advertise subscription renewal."
"It does not make Windows slow, as compared to all of the third part antiviruses."
"Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"The installation is straightforward."
"The most valuable aspect lies in its automation capabilities, particularly within security automation."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is the small updates that keep my machine relatively clean from any infections."
"Offers good protection."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"In terms of improvements for their technical support, a focus on enhancing response times could be beneficial."
"We would like to see more tools for managing on-premises security... Sometimes, we have the tools, like Defender, to manage security in the cloud, but because we are so focused on the cloud, we forget the fact that we need to be sure about the security of the on-premises environment, specifically Active Directory."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"Reporting could be improved. I would like to see how many security incidents occurred in the last six months, how many devices were highly exposed to security risks, and how many devices were actually compromised."
"The GUI is very complex and could be more user friendly."
"Its user interface (UI) can be improved. Currently, in the console, you have to dig down for certain things. They've got many different layers to get to things instead of having it all on the surface. You have to go three folds lower to get to specific functionality or click a particular option. It would be good if we can manage the console through menus and instead of three clicks, we can do things in one click. They need to change the UI and work on it in terms of a better user experience."
"It can get a bit laggy sometimes. Other than that, we don't have any issues. They constantly tweak it and fix it up based on users' feedback. It has improved a lot over the past four years. Defender for Endpoint never really used to be a good endpoint security solution, but over the past couple of years, Microsoft has invested heavily in it. So, it has come a long way in all aspects of endpoint security. If they want to make it better, they should just continue investing in the current path of what they've been doing over the past couple of years."
"There are likely some technical improvements or features that could be added, however, I cannot say, off the top of my head, what they would be."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Code42 Incydr is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 78 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding 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". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec, Qualys Multi-Vector EDR and HPE GreenLake for Backup and Recovery, 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 Code42 Incydr vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of 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.