We compared Avanan and Mimecast Email Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Avanan is highly praised for its customizability as well as its consistent advancements in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Mimecast Email Security is appreciated for its efficient archiving capabilities and effective protection against targeted threats. Its seamless integration with Microsoft 365 also earned high marks.
Room for Improvement: Avanan can enhance its alert clearance speed, decrease false positives, and improve scanning and backup options. Mimecast Email Security should focus on improving its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and ease of setup.
Service and Support: Avanan's customer service is consistently commended for its exceptional quality, efficiency, and expertise. Mimecast's customer service elicits varied opinions, with some customers expressing satisfaction with its responsiveness and effectiveness, while others perceive it as unsatisfactory.
Ease of Deployment: Users like Avanan's trouble-free setup and easy updates. Users had mixed experiences with Mimecast Email Security's setup. Some users found it fast and uncomplicated, while others found it moderately complex.
Pricing: Avanan offers affordable, transparent SaaS-based pricing. Users find it cost-effective, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. Mimecast Email Security is generally seen as costly, and some users struggle to justify the expense. It’s perceived as more expensive than competing solutions.
ROI: Avanan has consistently provided positive results by enhancing email network security and contributing to revenue growth. It is challenging to measure the return on investment for Mimecast Email Security.
Comparison Results: Avanan is praised for its ease of implementation, adaptability, and cost-effectiveness. Users say Avanan could improve by reducing false positives and providing better documentation. Mimecast is commended for its archiving and targeted threat protection capabilities. On the other hand, Mimecast faces challenges with its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and high pricing.
"The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"The risk level notifications are most valuable. We get to know what kind of intrusion or attack is there, and we can fix a problem on time."
"Threat Explorer is one of the features that I very much like because it is a real-time report that allows you to identify, analyze, and trace security attacks."
"It also gives me good visibility because, with Defender, I'm using a Microsoft product to defend Microsoft products. The integration was really seamless and I have wide visibility because it picks up almost everything. Literally, I can see almost every activity that happens, from the e-mail to the workstation itself."
"I like its investigation capabilities, as that is what is most important to me. It is fairly simple with a user-friendly interface."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"The good part is that you don't have to configure it, which is very convenient."
"The integration with all our existing and new applications is great."
"Email inspection has saved many employees from spam attacks and viruses from unauthorized sources."
"Email Attachment Protection detects any insecure files and quickly blocks them to prevent the spread of viruses to other secure documents."
"The most valuable feature of Avanan is its effectiveness. When scanning incoming emails for threats it can in an automated fashion, quarantine suspicious attachments."
"It can detect corrupted files and filters out documents with viruses."
"Easy to use for non-technical users."
"The customizable rules allow you to change aspects."
"It is simple to deploy this platform and interact with the set features."
"The solution is scalable."
"The piece that is most valuable from the Mimecast standpoint will be the sandboxing feature."
"The solution offers good technical support."
"Its administration console is very easy to use. The administration console is absolutely important because you interact with the platform through it."
"It's good, it keeps the spam out."
"It's really quite user-friendly. In terms of technical superiority and the product itself, there are no complaints. It is really cutting edge."
"The solution's performance is good."
"We like Mimecast's spam filtering. The email signature feature is also a big plus for our users."
"In one of the reports I can get the exact place where a vulnerable file resides. But for that, I need to explicitly go into the device and check. If they could include that file part in the report, without my having to go to the device itself, that would help."
"The certification training for Defender for 365 needs to be deeper and incorporate Sentinel. I took all the security courses except one, and Sentinel isn't included."
"The only thing they should improve is the licensing model. They should stop changing it. A year ago, the five features I mentioned were included in one product. Now, three of them are bundled into one product, and you have to pay extra for the other two. I don't mind paying extra, but I don't want them to change it every year or every six months. I need to know what I'm looking at and not worry about it next year."
"There needs to be an improvement in integrating the product to work across multiple operating systems, and to have better support for non-Microsoft file types."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. It depends on the architecture, but we would like to make it more scalable for both data centers."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"Microsoft should provide more documentation for users so they can self-educate. I would like to see more documentation for advanced security features."
"They have moved features from one console to another. Things have been moved around in the interface and it takes me time to find where certain features are."
"Being cloud first and because we are in the movie business, we use a lot of Macintoshes. So, there is absolutely no reason for us to have Active Directory whatsoever. However, if you are using Office 365, you must have Active Directory in order to reset passwords. Even though we have a single sign-on provider, we must have Azure Active Directory for Office 365, which is really stupid. As a cloud application, you would think that I don't need Active Directory, which I don't need for anything else except Office 365. We have one server inside that space to help us manage Active Directory just for Office 365. This is a very sore point, but it is what it is."
"When sending bulky emails, the system slows down and takes a long time before it responds effectively to our requests."
"The unified dashboard that it displays needs some improvements in terms of the KPIs that they have."
"Sometimes it seemed like the allow list wasn't working. I've created many allow list rules however, they still seem to be blocked; the same is true with the blocked list rules."
"It is very difficult to find the required documentation."
"The system could be designed to give corporate emails first priority due to demands."
"The customer service team could come up with clear tutorials on how to use this platform to help new teams."
"It should also offer a quick backup in case any email is wrongly quarantined or deleted to ensure no data loss."
"They should improve the cookies management feature."
"The installation is not so straightforward."
"The solution should include more AI features instead of Mimecast's more general static configuration tooling."
"Lately, Mimecast's outbound mail servers have been regularly blocklisted by spam filters. That didn't happen a few years back, but it seems to be a more frequent problem these days. When a server is blocklisted, it means all of my outgoing mail ends up in the recipient's junk mail. That affects my reputation and business confidence."
"Their support should be improved. They are notorious for sending you to knowledge-based articles rather than actually talking to you, but that is, unfortunately, kind of becoming a trend with everything. In terms of features, I haven't had any complaints. However, I don't like the fact they moved to a paid training subscription model. They used to have a lot of free webinars for training, but they have started to charge for them in the past year."
"From an administrative point of view, Mimecast is a little bit cumbersome and difficult. It's not something that the end-user can easily find navigate themselves."
"I'd like to have better support from the product in the future."
"While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avanan is ranked 6th in Email Security with 21 reviews while Mimecast Email Security is ranked 5th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 23 reviews. Avanan is rated 9.2, while Mimecast Email Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Avanan writes "We've noticed a significant decline from people accidentally or intentionally clicking on things". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mimecast Email Security writes "It gives clients peace of mind and helps them educate their users about threats". Avanan is most compared with Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, IRONSCALES, Abnormal Security, Perception Point Advanced Email Security and Fortinet FortiMail, whereas Mimecast Email Security is most compared with Abnormal Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration, Cisco Secure Email and Cloudflare Area 1 Email Security. See our Avanan vs. Mimecast Email Security report.
We monitor all Email Security 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.