We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and WithSecure Elements 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."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The stability is very good."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"When the user gets authenticated, I can assign a different VPN or network to each user."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The solution is easy to configure and manage."
"This is a solid and stable solution."
"The integration capabilities are good."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy."
"It's got a very friendly user interface."
"The return on investment was very reasonable. It was low cost and it functioned, so the return on investment was excellent."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The solution is not stable."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"The support needs improvement."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution requires skillful users."
"The deployment status is not good in Mac devices and sometimes in Windows-based devices using GPO, like Active Directory, that are not on the local network."
"There is lagging in some of the authentication tools to support the newer versions, this is happening because they are not supported."
"The solution could add data to the endpoint."
"The pricing could use improvement."
"Compatibility issues between different versions."
"Fortinet needs to cover more areas where threats can come from."
"An area of improvement could be better integration with the active directory. I did not find it easy to configure."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Symantec Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. WithSecure Elements 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.