We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When selecting the best Endpoint Protection (EPP) for business, PeerSpot users feel Microsoft Defender is the better choice for Windows and Azure products, although Webroot does receive higher marks in the service and support and deployment categories.
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are the ease of use and it was available within the operating system."
"We like that it has a free version available."
"It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"Offers good protection."
"This product is flexible, and it is very easy to get updates from the Microsoft website."
"The attack surface reduction rules are the most valuable. We're able to have unattended remediation actions when the solution works side by side with a local antivirus like Microsoft Defender or Kaspersky. The attack surface reduction rules help us to proactively block and stop threats."
"Defender is integrated into the operating system. It's integrated with everything. You don't have to spend time analyzing what you have to do to be sure that the integration is okay between the security tool and all the other apps. This, from my point of view, is the main advantage."
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"Low performance requirements."
"Webroot's tech support is pretty good; they've given me some pointers."
"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."
"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."
"The ease of use of the centralized admin console is its best asset."
"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."
"Speed"
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The frequency of the patching, and the frequency of the updates, are not included with the free version."
"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."
"Its interface can be improved a little bit. We would like to have some sort of centralization. It should have something like a central server that is managing all the other clients. There are solutions from Kaspersky or ESET NOD32 that are really doing this kind of thing currently. We would like to see something similar from Microsoft."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by adding more security features."
"The product itself does not necessarily need improvement, but the support and implementation of the product are the disaster cases."
"The onboarding and deployment could be more user-friendly, and there is room to grow in some of the reports. I don't want them to be oversimplified or overly complex, but there is room for improvement in the reporting it can do. It's relatively minor."
"A concern is ransomware, whether people can penetrate and encrypt my data or steal my credit card/banking information."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"An updated UI would be nice, but is not hardly used."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"Since they're dealing with multi-core environments now, the best option would be for them to enhance the product so that the product can automatically do an assessment on the machine."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."
"There should be a Webroot Business Endpoint Protection mobile app."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. 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 Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, HP Wolf Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cynet. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Webroot Business 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.