We performed a comparison between Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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."I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"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."
"The stability is very good."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The insight that the solution provides is the most valuable aspect. The security scanning they do is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of Datto EDR is the visibility of the endpoints."
"Datto Endpoint Detection and Response is a perfect product for endpoint security."
"Its threat intelligence feature is beneficial. This solution smoothly integrates with SIEM."
"Easy to understand and easy to set up endpoint security solution. It's a multifeatured product with web content filtering and automated investigation features. It also has a fantastic vulnerability management dashboard."
"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."
"It is quite stable. We have not had any cases, i.e., viruses, that would require a reboot, etc. We have never had a situation where we needed to reinstall the tools as a result of the Defender application or a feature being corrupt."
"The features I have found most valuable are the ransomware and malware protection. The solution detects malware live and whenever it detects suspicious activity, it quarantines it."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite good. We haven't really experienced any issues with it."
"I am using it for very simple purposes. It is perfect and quite effective. I have been using it for a while, and I have never had any virus infection, data leak, or other security breaches. It works fine for standalone purposes. If you log on to OneDrive, it has ransomware protection."
"We had certain compliance and usage issues. For example, our company wanted to go with CIS, but we didn't have a proper way of measuring whether the endpoints have the right standards in place or whether they were compliant with CIS. Microsoft Defender was like a one-stop for most things because it gave us the vulnerability and patching scores so that our vulnerability management teams can focus on covering up the vulnerabilities and the patching team can check the vulnerable versions and deploy the right versions."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Detections could be improved."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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"
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution is not stable."
"The solution could improve by having more deployment methods."
"The deployment of the solution right now is terrible. We find it to be very bad. It could be improved enormously."
"The solution should allow the automation of playbooks."
"This solution needs to move beyond relying on virus definitions alone and protect the system using behavioral analysis of the processes that are running."
"It makes your Surface devices hot. It is resource-intensive. It strains your CPU, not more than other file scanners around, but it also does a lot more. When you are transmitting files or data, it is continuously scanning the traffic and analyzing it bit by bit to see what's going on, and that, of course, is costly in terms of CPU. It is CPU intensive, and if you are on battery, it drains your battery fast. That's the only drawback that it has."
"The time it takes to implement policies has room for improvement."
"I am not sure if I will be using this product in the future because of the price."
"The product should reduce updates since it is hard to keep up."
"It would be helpful if they offered video tutorial guides."
"I would like to see online updates for patches for this solution. I would also like to see online information about what is trending in the market in terms of spams, viruses, or trojans. It takes some time to understand how this solution works. A few things are unclear at the beginning, such as whether it actually restricts the virus or spam at the initial stage, or when there is a security update, how will we come to know and how will it get synchronized. It would be really helpful if there is some kind of knowledge base in the form of video, audio, or document that can explain in a user-friendly way the setup, features, risks, and process to mitigate the risks. Currently, I have installed endpoint security for every individual system. I could not install it like other endpoint solutions where we have a server and a client. It would be really helpful if Microsoft Windows Defender has a server-client based model so that I can save some bandwidth when it downloads or uploads features. It will be helpful if we have a LAN-based or WAN-based controlling system."
"It is not very scalable from the eyes of an MSP because there is no dashboard that you can use to see all of your devices that have Windows Defender unless you have your own dashboard or an RMM tool to actually look at it. So, you might not get to know that a particular computer of a client is doing something, and it might have got a virus. That person might know that, but unless you set it up to actually send you the information, you won't get to know that. That's one of the things that is hard with Microsoft Defender. It is not made for the MSP world where you have one pane of glass to see all of your clients with Microsoft Defender on it unless your RMM tool already has that built-in and it can see the telemetry from Microsoft Defender."
More Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 44th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 3 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.6, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Good security scanning, but has a complex setup and the stability isn't ideal". 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". Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, Huntress and Microsoft Defender XDR, 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 Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.