We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The stability is very good."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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."
"Intercept X helps with internal alerts, application access, and triggering support teams."
"It is easy to interact with, and its cost is also good."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The Managed Detection and Response service provided by Intercept X Endpoint is highly valuable. With a team of 600-700 individuals monitoring systems, they swiftly respond to attacks, either informing us to isolate or directly removing threats. This full MDR service is especially recommended for sectors like finance, where data security is critical. The deep learning technology within Intercept X Endpoint enhances our security posture by analyzing behaviors and algorithms to differentiate between legitimate users and threats, effectively preventing attacks on our network infrastructure."
"The product efficiently prevents data leakages."
"The EDR (Enhanced Data Detection and Response) and the DLP (Data Loss Prevention) components are valuable assets."
"There do not seem to be any limitations to the scalability of this product."
"Very stable solution."
"There are times when Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response tags an executable as malicious when it is trying to get executed on the machine. In this case, it prevents the execution and it gives you a process view of things where you can look into what has happened and whether it is a genuine process trying to access some system activities, or it's a malicious one. Depending upon the process, it gives you a clear identification, and we can do the containment from the interface itself and isolate the machine from the network. The process review on network isolation is good."
"I've mainly found the antivirus and antispyware features valuable. The documentation is okay as well."
"The most valuable features of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response are its immediate response and investigation."
"The most valuable feature of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is its ability to conduct large scans on the endpoints without affecting the network."
"In Symantec, we have found that the most important feature is Application and Device Control."
"The most valuable features are that it is easy to connect and global settings are good."
"The solution can scale well."
"The security is good."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"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."
"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."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I would like the solution to have more functions and to be more user-friendly."
"When there is an event generated by either the firewall or Intercept X, and the originating IP address is the same, these should be merged into a single event rather than two."
"We would like to deploy across a variety of machines simultaneously through the network."
"When I use a proxy, I can bypass Sophos, which is an area that needs improvement."
"The cloud management console could be a little more user-friendly."
"When we load Intercept X, it puts a load on the device. When it is scanning, it slows down the device. A system with basic specifications completely slows down till the scan is complete. They should improve this part."
"The solution can be expensive, although we do see the value in it."
"It would be better if it can automatically generate a report for each and every user so that the users get to know the things that shouldn't be accessed from their PCs. It can have information about malicious and non-malicious sites so users are aware of them, and they don't access malicious websites. Such reports can be generated at the end of the day. We should also be able to get through to their support team quickly. Currently, it takes more than half an hour to get through to a technical person."
"The solution can always be more stable and more secure."
"The interface is very complicated."
"In the future, it would be nice to have playbooks in the tool, to allow for some of the common activities to be automated. For example, some of the scannings of the malware can be too manual for a specific device. Additionally, a vulnerability manager would be beneficial."
"It would be good if it can anticipate zero-day attacks. I don't know how it can be done and if it is even a feature of this product."
"While they are quite dynamic, they need to ensure they are detecting threats faster in the future to keep people safer."
"Its UI could be more user-friendly."
"It would be beneficial to have more integration and compatibility with other platforms."
"They do need to minimize the number of agents installed on a server."
More Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 25th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 28 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response writes "A highly stable and affordable solution for detecting and preventing security threats". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.