We performed a comparison between BigFix and CylancePROTECT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"It has improved reliability upon delivery of software and has also helped reduce software expenses. The extensibility of BigFix helps to create custom solutions where we may have considered purchasing something instead."
"It's good for reporting hardware and software."
"It allows us to quickly deploy capabilities that we need, whether it be security or non-security. We use it to keep systems up to date, deploy new drivers, find the information we need in the case of security incidents. The capability allows us to gather a lot of information very quickly and it also allows us to have a centralized reporting feature and a centralized deployment capability which is nice."
"BigFix is easy to use."
"The patch management and the BigFix Inventory have been the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of BigFix is the software deployment."
"BigFix can manage lost devices, so you can wipe them remotely to ensure the IP doesn't get out in public. Unified endpoint security is a new perspective. I know that HCL is also collaborating with IBM, but I'm not sure if there is any cooperation between them and MaaS360 or other endpoint components."
"Being able to intelligently create reports, gather data, export CSVs and give that to the leadership of some of the client groups that my team supports has helped my organization."
"CylancePROTECT is very stable - we've had no issues with performance and no errors or bugs."
"It actively monitors the behavior and activity of processes and will, without hesitation, terminate at root anything it determines to be suspect."
"The solution is very quick at easily changing the levels of protection for each computer and the server."
"Specifically for a Windows domain environment, the product can be customized and pushed via GPO or SCCM without issue."
"Blackberry Protect offers endpoint protection. It's easy to deploy. It's scalable and stable."
"The solution is pretty easy to scale."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Detections could be improved."
"I would like to see more emphasis on using the web console, to have the same power as the full fat client console that they do they now. It's a lighter way to log in and it would be faster for our operators to do their work. The console tends to take a long time for a large number of clients."
"One aspect that could be improved is the speed of the console. Sometimes it can be slow, which is something that needs to be addressed."
"I would like to see the Self Service section made more user-friendly."
"The product is quite buggy and complicated to use."
"The stability is generally pretty good. The one thing that we came across is the battle between load on endpoints and load on our servers and relays versus how quickly, effectively and reliably actions can be taken. I'd like to not have to take an action on a system while I'm working with someone and then have to say whether something will happen between five seconds or thirty minutes from that point."
"The reporting structure could be a little more simplistic. Currently, it throws too many vulnerabilities. Some of them are not needed because they are only informational and limitations, and they are not of much help. It doesn't need to show us these things."
"The self-service application seems to need some work to replace the client UI. There are a lot of pop-ups if you use a baseline as the object that you're setting to a workstation. Unless you're using web UI, the message is not customizable in the user notification."
"I would like better support on the backend."
"It should provide more details about the events that they have detected."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"rom my experience interacting with the primary or the central administrative console, it's quite complex. You would need a fair bit of technical experience to set it up, implement and maintain it. That would be one area for improvement."
"The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT."
"It was not effective. There were a lot of false positives, even when we use Adobe, and everybody uses Adobe, which is not a threat."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"The price for this EPP platform is expensive and could be improved."
"The management console needs a little maturity in how it presents data and allows the administrator to drill down or search across systems."
BigFix is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 91 reviews while CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 39 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Tanium, whereas CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our BigFix vs. CylancePROTECT 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.