We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Kaspersky Endpoint Security comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing with a good interface and has excellent customer support. Defender for Endpoint did come out on top in the Ease of Deployment category.
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The stability is very good."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"We have had no troubles installing, maintaining, or deploying the product for our clients."
"The signature update is done securely."
"The security is very good, compared to some other products."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security protects against viruses and dangerous software, and it's also great because it has a component that is useful for the deployment of software versions to the end user's computer."
"The solution has been quite stable. The performance is good."
"Especially the firewalling, I found useful, as you can control the applications and services on a granular level to tell them where they have access to or not."
"The reporting feature is good. Also, the device control is good."
"It is very efficient. I like its simplicity."
"The protection that it provides is quite good."
"Defender is stable. The performance is good."
"Microsoft Defender is always running. It is doing its job, so it is fine. I don't have any issues with the way it was implemented or how we are running it. We have been upgrading IT throughout the years, but there have been no issues."
"The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been a valuable feature."
"It integrates very well with all Windows workstations or other Microsoft Endpoint products. It also works quite well. So far, I have not had any issue that hasn't been sorted out. It doesn't use too many resources, so you don't have to install different things."
"The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated."
"It's an enterprise solution that provides a centralized console and it supports all the platforms that we use, including Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, and Android."
"Automatic scanning and cleaning of viruses is the best and most valuable feature helping this tool to thrive. If any viruses are found, they are cleaned automatically."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"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 solution is not stable."
"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."
"Utilizing the CPU usages during the scan process needs to be improved."
"As far as improvements, maybe the licensing could be cheaper, but I think this solution is pretty okay."
"It would be ideal with the solution offered more documentation."
"The GUI of the product is too basic, making it an area where improvements are required."
"From time to time, some users loose connection via the Network Agent."
"A big improvement would be allowing us to reconfigure the agents and change what to whitelist for a specific user. If the user is not happy with the configuration and is being blocked from certain sites, we should be able to reconfigure the monitoring mechanics to make it more flexible."
"There are quite a number of areas for improvement. The first area for improvement is that I find this solution to be very resource intensive when you're running a particular task, even a mere scanning task, even though it's running in the background. When you go to inspect the resources you realize it makes the machine very slow. It takes up a lot of resources even though there are no particular scanning tasks scheduled to run. That's one of the issues."
"The deployment could be better."
"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."
"A challenge is that it is not a multi-tenant solution. Microsoft's tenant is a licensed tenant. I'm an MSSP. So, I have multiple customers. In Microsoft's world, that means that I can't just buy an E5 license and give that out to all my customers. That won't work because all of the customer data resides within a single tenant in Microsoft's world. Other products—such as SentinelOne, Palo Alto Cortex, CrowdStrike, et cetera—are multi-tenant. So, I can have it at the top of the pyramid for my analyst to look into it and see all the customers, but each customer's data is separate. If the customer wants to look at what we see, they would only see their data, whereas in the Microsoft world, if I've got multiple customers connected to the same Microsoft tenant, they would see everybody else's data, which is a privacy problem in Europe. It is not possible to share the data, and it is a breach of privacy."
"Notifications are always popping up — I hate that."
"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."
"There is room to improve the security of the solution."
"Defender's cloud integration could be improved."
"The pricing could be a bit better."
"I would like to see fewer pop messages and alerts."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.