We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"The most valuable features are the Windows Firewall and the regular virus definition updates. These features are very helpful and have helped to improve our security."
"This solution definitely increases our security posture. When you are reviewing your existing fleet or endpoints and based on the configuration that you put out of your Defender for Endpoint, you then receive a security score from Microsoft. Depending on what rules you have configured, what policies you have deployed, and what attack surface reduction rules that you have set up and deployed, it is almost gamifying information security in the sense that you are always trying to achieve a higher score. The more hardening you perform on your endpoints, the better score you receive. This generally tends to give you a better peace of mind, but also makes you secure at the same time."
"We apply the DLP policies across a range of endpoints and it is very accurate when reporting vulnerabilities, including those in email attachments."
"The best thing I like about it is its interaction with the other Defender products. It provides the ability to push telemetry up. It gives me endpoint visibility and allows me to take automated actions."
"Defender is stable enough and is competitive with the other products in the market."
"The solution's latest features for threat analysis are updated to provide us with future protection against the latest threats worldwide."
"In terms of the installation, ease of use, and user interface, Defender has been great so far."
"It has helped our clients to reduce the time to action on insider threats because it can be integrated."
"The product can block the uploads to cloud services."
"Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's responses are faster. Its installation is also reliable. The security score helps with the security part."
"The product is easy to configure."
"There's a good amount of documentation in case you run into any problems."
"I rate Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's stability a ten out of ten."
"The product has improved compliance and confidence. We are aware of the data that is leaving our organization. It provides confidence in data management and information storage."
"For Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365, I would give it a 10 out of 10. It provides all the insights and information."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex."
"The solution could be more friendly for end-users, with different type of scans or scheduled scans for it."
"There's a lot of manual effort involved to configure what we need."
"I would like to have a dashboard that shows an overview of the results for the enterprise."
"Something that is unique to Microsoft is its licensing model. When you go out and you buy McAfee or Symantec, you know what you're getting out of the box, but with Microsoft, often, when you're looking to achieve a certain set of capabilities, those capabilities are spread across different products. You might try to do something you could do with CrowdStrike, but then find out that you also need to purchase Microsoft Defender for Identity or Microsoft Defender for Azure. You realize that when they talk about what they can offer within the Microsoft platform, it's really the suite of investments. So, sometimes, you may find yourself buying Defender for Endpoint thinking that it matches CrowdStrike, but then you find that Microsoft really needs to sell you something else. One plus one will equal three, but when you have a very concise platform, such as CrowdStrike, you know what you're going to get."
"I would like to have additional features such as DNS lookup, which would help for detecting malicious sites."
"If there were more template queries in the library, that would make it much easier. They could have basic things, like, "Where's the IP for this user?" or, "What file was downloaded from this user?" If there were more of those basic queries that would help."
"They do not provide language options beyond the ones already available, so our language option is missing."
"The support is poor."
"The solution should provide better integration with other systems."
"There is a lot of ambiguity when you are setting up labels, such as sensitive information labels. It is a little daunting at first if you don't have prior knowledge, and there is a little bit of a learning curve for setting up the labels. Some of the setup wizards could be more helpful from an AI perspective. They can streamline the setup through more AI technologies so that you don't have to jump through so many hoops and different menus and dropdowns. It would be useful to have a setup wizard that is more hands-off and engaging for setting up the information type labels. If you tell them this is what we're trying to protect, it should basically start to lead you down that path of best practices. Such a feature would be great."
"I would like Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention to be on the source code or SQL databases. It is difficult to do classification and labeling when you have a third-party source code or a third-party Oracle database. It is seamless when it comes to Microsoft documents but is not so with third-party source codes. Microsoft needs to work on it a little bit more."
"The AI advancements can improve the false positives."
"A site can have different containers where you store data. We have always wanted to apply compliance, labels, and policies at the container level, rather than to an outer shell or at the site level. That is something we have been looking forward to and I believe Microsoft is already planning something like that."
"There is a need for improvements, particularly in ensuring that file-based recognition is more reliable and comprehensive."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 5th in Microsoft Security Suite with 182 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is ranked 12th in Microsoft Security Suite with 13 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention writes "Automation has given us consistent analytics and improved quality of insights into user activity". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Amazon Macie, Microsoft Intune and Trellix DLP. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
