We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Kaspersky Endpoint Security comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing with a good interface and has excellent customer support. Defender for Endpoint did come out on top in the Ease of Deployment category.
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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 tool's interface is good."
"One of the most valuable features is that it's quite secure. I'm satisfied with this solution."
"Overall, the product is quite flexible."
"The solution is secure."
"Deployment and centralized management are essential for us because of the number of loads that we have along with the number of geographic locations where we are based."
"Using dashboards, it is very easy to manage."
"I have found the security, device, web and application controls to be the most valuable features."
"The hardware hardware detection is the most valuable feature. The feature where you can block and unblock mobile devices is also good."
"Defender works in the background monitoring the traffic for viruses."
"Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"The virus scanning capability is excellent, and it feeds all the logs into the Microsoft 365 Defender portal, making them easy to search for."
"One of the main features is the solution is very light on resources and we do not have any problems with it."
"It is stable and very easy to use."
"File protection is the most valuable feature. Antivirus security on the Level OS, Microsoft Defender, and Microsoft Guard for 2019."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it is embedded into the Windows system. Additionally, the performance is good and simple to maintain."
"User-friendly, offering safety and security."
"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 dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"There should be some AI involved. We already have machine learning involved in recent releases but machine learning should be more enhanced in the upcoming versions."
"There are times when Microsoft Windows's antivirus called Defender interferes with the functionality of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. There should be better integration with Windows."
"We are having some troubles because some American companies we work with don't want to work with Kaspersky."
"They can improve the zero-day exploit to be more effective."
"The product needs to incorporate training programs or webinars for users. The solution needs to improve its support as well. It also needs to detect ransomware."
"It slows down the system sometimes, and it has the occasional false positive where it deems something a virus when it isn't."
"I've had some problems with the web interface. For example, when I was running a trace, it's difficult to find this function, but I can see it when I go on the server. So, if I want to implement the EDR functions on the web interface, it's very difficult because the command button or the link doesn't appear."
"It should be more secure and detect new malware as it's released."
"I would like to be able to set up any kind of protection I want in the firewall, any IP address or any number."
"The solution needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices."
"Windows Firewall is integrated with Windows Defender. Over the last few days, I have had a problem with defining a wildcard on Windows Firewall. For example, I wanted to pull out the connection of my program and install a software package with a lot of executable files. I wanted to prevent it from accessing the internet. I could not select executables by using a wildcard. I had to select a single executable with its full name."
"I wish they would extend the use of the Security Central portal, even for the free option of Defender. Because, as companies grow, it is labor intensive to manage the AV and detection part of it. For companies already subscribed to Office 365, I think this would be a good enhancement."
"In terms of improvements for their technical support, a focus on enhancing response times could be beneficial."
"I would like to see fewer pop messages and alerts."
"The system can always be simplified and have a better integration check. More detailed reports would be good. When it does the integrated check, it just shows if the system is okay but I want to know what happened."
"Our team's knowledge of the solution needs to be improved, and Microsoft could do a better job conveying the necessary information to users. We could proactively use the tool more and explore capabilities we are not yet utilizing."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". On the other hand, 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.