We performed a comparison between Fortra's Agari and Symantec Messaging Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Email Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"The basic features are okay and I'm satisfied with the Defender."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"The two main features that prove most beneficial for us are URL scanning and attachment scanning."
"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."
"It also gives the vulnerability status according to the versions you have selected. Let's say you have Google Chrome. It mentions the versions it has, and it updates. Within two hours of an update, it is reflected in the dashboard. That's really nice to have."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"If spam or some kind of malicious email gets past Mimecast and gets into our email environment, we can go into Agari and we can search for it."
"I am impressed with the tool's discovery capabilities which help me find out who is sending the emails on the company's behalf. I also find the ability to detect and generate reports on phishing emails a valuable feature."
"It is really important for large companies to have the brand protection that is provided by Agari."
"It comes with a lot of helpful tips for complicated areas."
"It is a solid and stable product."
"The anti-malware and spam features are valuable."
"The most valuable features of Symantec Messaging Gateway are advanced content filtering, malware, and antivirus defense."
"It has very good capabilities for managing malware."
"I like that it's simple and easy to configure, deploy, and manage. The reporting function has all the features we're looking for, and we are fine with that."
"The solution is stable and the performance is good."
"The solution is excellent at blocking spam."
"The cloud-based interface is very user-friendly."
"Configuration requires going to a lot of places rather than just accessing one tab."
"There is room for improvement with the UI."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"They can improve their security in a way where a customer can know if all their attachments are safe or not to open through a report. The solution does its job perfectly, but it never reports to the customer whether those attachments have been stopped before or not."
"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."
"Microsoft security solutions work as expected. They are constantly updating the solutions to make them better. At the same time, the changes can impact a customer's environment, and we need to adjust settings. Sometimes we aren't aware of the changes, and nothing is pushed from the backend automatically."
"Too many false positives and lacks an accurate capability to detect malicious SharePoint sites."
"One area for improvement is integration. For example, when it comes to external SaaS platforms, we were not able to get a lot of information on integrations with such apps for security and authentication."
"Some customers in the financial sector do not like the cloud solution because they don't want data to be transferred to a US-based cloud."
"The protocol is quite complicated, which may not be something that could be improved, but it would be better if it was simplified."
"The product's user interface is clunky. We have difficulty in finding what we need. I would also like to see automation in the onboarding processes."
"The product must improve the user dashboards."
"It is a nice product but is not user friendly in terms of the graphical interface. It is poor and is not rich in terms of the human interface."
"They really need to create a good package that competes with Microsoft."
"They have updated the version of the Messaging Gateway and the new features they are adding the need to be re-evaluated. They have done some changes on the policy."
"We've had issues in the past where the user finds spam, and Symantec does not recognize it as spam."
"It will provide Excel reports and PDF reports, but it would be great if they supported the concept of Crystal Reports."
"Symantec Messaging Gateway can improve detection because most of them are false negatives or false positives that we are trying to troubleshoot. Additionally, we are having routing problems and they are somehow connected to DNS issues."
"Messaging Gateway's advanced malware detection could be improved."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortra's Agari is ranked 27th in Email Security with 4 reviews while Symantec Messaging Gateway is ranked 6th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 20 reviews. Fortra's Agari is rated 8.6, while Symantec Messaging Gateway is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortra's Agari writes "Helps to detect and generate reports on phishing emails and saves from email compromises ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Messaging Gateway writes "A stable and reasonably priced solution that performs well and has a very good malware database". Fortra's Agari is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection, Cisco Secure Email, Valimail Monitor, Abnormal Security and Mimecast Email Security, whereas Symantec Messaging Gateway is most compared with Cisco Secure Email, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Fortinet FortiMail, Trend Micro Email Security and Proofpoint Email Protection. See our Fortra's Agari vs. Symantec Messaging Gateway 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.