We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and Lookout 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."Impressive detection capabilities"
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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"
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The detection and response console is the most valuable feature."
"The 10 hours a week that we are freeing up from having to manage and monitor our AV solution has really allowed us to focus on other areas of the business. This has been a huge return on investment."
"The CrowdStrike Falcon dashboard is good, and we haven't had any problems with it."
"The CS falcon agent is a lightweight agent compared with other agents of EDR products."
"The most useful feature is that we do not need to install or keep signature files. Regular scanning that consumes a lot of computer resources is not needed."
"The anomaly detection is the most valuable feature."
"The DLP is the most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"The most valuable features are the antivirus as a whole, the anti-malware, and all of the protection features that scan our enterprise devices."
"The solution is stable."
"The protection offered by the product is the most valuable feature. It detects vulnerabilities or traps on our users' phones and then prompts them to clean up their devices. Tools we used previously would only discover, which required us to gather information on the backend, so Lookout is a welcome upgrade."
"On the outside, the main differentiation is because Lookout ingest. They have ingested basically all of the apps for the last ten years and all the versions of all the apps, and we have that in a corporate database that allows us to do very large-scale machine learning and analysis on that data set. That's not something that any of the competitors really have the capability to do because they don't have access to the data set. A lot of the apps you can no longer get them because that version of the app is five or six years old, and it just doesn't exist anywhere anymore, except within our infrastructure. So, the ability to have that very rich dataset and learn from that dataset is a real differentiator."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The solution is not stable."
"The support needs improvement."
"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"
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"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 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."
"CrowdStrike Falcon sometimes wrongly flags things as malicious. Let's say a user is active on Chrome only. Sometimes, our cross-segmenting will fetch from the backend data and show that it is malicious because of memory or CPU utilization."
"The malware analysis could be improved, as that's what we use the solution for the most and that change would make it a better EDR tool."
"I would like to see a little bit more in the offline scanning ability. This just comes from my background in what I have done in other positions. They only scan on demand, so I always have this fear that we sometimes maybe email out a dormant virus and can be held liable for that. That is something where I would like to see a little bit more robustness to the tool."
"Support, particularly related to after-sales and after deployment, could be improved a bit. If you need to connect to support, it takes at least a day to reach the support team and get a proper reply."
"We sometimes get false positives."
"I have experience with a product called SentinelOne, which has a feature that allows for the customization of query languages. I would like to see such a feature for CloudStrike."
"There are some aspects of the UI that could use some improvement, e.g., working in groups. I build a group, then I have to manually assign prevention policies, update policies, etc., but there is no function to copy that group. So, if I wanted to make a subgroup for troubleshooting or divide workstations into groups of laptops and desktops, then I have to manually build a brand new group. I can't just copy a build from one to another. Additionally, in order to do any work within a group, I have to first do the work on the respective prevention policy page or individual policy page, then remove the group if the group is assigned to a different prevention policy, remove the prevention policy, and then add the new one in. So, it can get a little hectic. It would be easier if I could add and remove things from the group page rather than having to go into the policy pages to do it."
"The pricing is a bit too high."
"We just submitted an enhancement request reflecting the main area we want to see improvement in; the APIs. Currently, we're able to build dashboards, but it's somewhat backward because we use our MDM API to create them. Lookout should provide API to customers so we can query our data and use it in our cloud, and this is the only outstanding area for improvement with the product right now."
"From the analysis that we've done, they do seem to be maybe a step behind in trying to enter the market with a new solution. But when they do pick up, they do come out with some good products."
"The stability depends on the service from where you access it. Because sometimes, the place you are in, you have Gateway. You don't have Gateway. The gateway is overutilized. At the end, you need to go through their gateways. And this is the key point here. You have a tracking point. If it's not well orchestrated, and it scales up as you add more to the existing team, you will suffer"
"Lookout was moving into the SSE space. And so their work on SecureWeb Gateway and SD-WAN is still sort of evolving."
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 107 reviews while Lookout is ranked 43rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 5 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8, while Lookout is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Lookout writes "Easy to use and setup". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas Lookout is most compared with Check Point Harmony Mobile, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Zimperium, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and IBM MaaS360. See our CrowdStrike Falcon vs. Lookout 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.