We compared CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, CylancePROTECT is praised for its exceptional threat detection capabilities, customer service, positive ROI, and ease of use, while users highlight the need for improvements in detection capabilities and integration. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint stands out for its comprehensive threat protection, efficient system management, and incident response capabilities, with users also satisfied with customer service and ROI. Pricing, setup, and licensing are perceived positively for both products, with room for improvement in certain areas mentioned by users.
Features: CylancePROTECT stands out for its exceptional threat detection, zero-day attack prevention, easy implementation, low system impact, and comprehensive analytics. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat protection, real-time monitoring, efficient system management, user-friendly interface, seamless integration, and incident response capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for CylancePROTECT is described as minimal, straightforward, and hassle-free, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's setup process is deemed straightforward and doesn't require much effort., The ROI from CylancePROTECT was highly positive, delivering improved security measures, increased efficiency, and reduced costs. Users praised its user-friendly interface and fast deployment. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint was seen as positive with users expressing satisfaction with its performance, effectiveness in protecting against threats, ease of use, and real-time insights.
Room for Improvement: CylancePROTECT has room for improvement in detection capabilities, integration with other security tools, reporting and analytics functionalities, and user interface. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has areas for enhancement according to user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required to establish a new tech solution varies for both CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Some users for CylancePROTECT mentioned different timeframes for deployment and setup, while for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, users also had different timeframes but emphasized the importance of context., The customer service for CylancePROTECT is praised for exceptional assistance, personalized guidance, and resolving issues promptly. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides helpful, efficient, and prompt support with effective solutions.
The summary above is based on 98 interviews we conducted recently with CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"It provides good insight into the programs, applications, or websites that may need attention."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"What I like best about CylancePROTECT is its accuracy, as it doesn't give many false positives."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"We apply the DLP policies across a range of endpoints and it is very accurate when reporting vulnerabilities, including those in email attachments."
"There are some competitive products on the market, but the best is Microsoft Defender because it's very easy to integrate. That's one reason a lot of clients want Microsoft Defender. It's also very easy to implement compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and the updates are very simple."
"It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"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."
"Because it has been integrated with the OS, we get the entire software inventories, and we even get access to the registries. Those are the primary features."
"It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution is not stable."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"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"
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The initial deployment was quite complicated."
"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"The user interface is outdated."
"It's a good solution but some features just need to be updated."
"The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward."
"The management console needs a little maturity in how it presents data and allows the administrator to drill down or search across systems."
"The product does not do a lot of reporting on what it is taking care of. Enhanced reporting would be a welcome improvement."
"Right now, there's a portal for Azure, portals for Microsoft Office, and portals for endpoints. It would be good to have only one portal and integrate everything."
"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."
"The solution could be more friendly for end-users, with different type of scans or scheduled scans for it."
"This solution needs to move beyond relying on virus definitions alone and protect the system using behavioral analysis of the processes that are running."
"It can be more secure."
"The onboarding and deployment could be more user-friendly, and there is room to grow in some of the reports. I don't want them to be oversimplified or overly complex, but there is room for improvement in the reporting it can do. It's relatively minor."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by providing more and different types of reports."
"The integration and effectiveness of email security could be better. It's already built-in to the solution and checks emails, scans the links they contain etc."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 40 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. 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". 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". CylancePROTECT is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.