We performed a comparison between Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum 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."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"Its false positives are very low, because the behavior analysis engine double checks them."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"The product's most valuable feature is the flexibility of installation with the console and a simple administration strategy."
"One of the most valuable features of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is its cloud console allows users to remotely isolate a single computer from a network in the event of an attack, enabling them to perform root cause analysis without disrupting the entire network. This is particularly useful for organizations that may not have expert resources for endpoint detection and response."
"Instead of having to wait for alerts, the IT security team can actively hunt for threats by proactively scanning endpoints to spot anomalies and security breaches."
"It offers features like system hardening, vulnerability management, patch management, and device control, which are not present in other solutions."
"The most beneficial aspect of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is its protection capabilities, followed by its device management capabilities. The ability to remotely install software is highly advantageous, making it a convenient and helpful feature."
"Kaspersky EDR is constantly updated and can respond to any threat nearly in real-time. They work hard to produce all the updates on time."
"The product is lightweight and does not slow down the PC. The malware and virus detection rate is also very good."
"The solution is easy to use."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum Pros →
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"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."
"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."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization."
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"Security features could be improved."
"The solution can improve the uninstallation process. The removal of the agent can be difficult. The purpose is for security, but it requires a lot of time and sometimes a special tool."
"In terms of the Pakistani market and talking from a salesperson's perspective, I'd suggest that Kaspersky introduce a bundle of Kaspersky EDR-Optimum or Kaspersky EDR-Expert along with its Business Select/Advance suite."
"An area for improvement in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum would be to provide the cloud console platform to all users, regardless of the number of licenses a company has purchased. For example, a company with 50 employees should have access to the cloud console platform even if they have only purchased a certain number of licenses for the solution."
"The solution needs to give more control to users on firewalls."
"They should provide more notifications for incidents and more clarification or information about malicious activity."
"Support is an area for improvement. It should have faster response times."
"EDR Optimum's scalability could be improved."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum Cons →
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum Pricing and Cost Advice →
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is ranked 21st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 17 reviews. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum writes "Great threat response, provides for proactivity, and has automated threat identification". Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CylancePROTECT and Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Business. See our Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum 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.
