We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and WatchGuard Threat 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."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Very stable solution."
"The pricing is fair. It's not too costly for our small organization."
"The most effective features of Intercept X Endpoint for threat prevention are ransomware protection, miscellaneous behavior detection, and network threat protection."
"I have found the most valuable feature to be the EDR."
"The solution has very good usability."
"We find all features valuable. It has zero-day protection, which is the most valuable feature of Intercept X. We have Intercept X with EDR. EDR is a very important feature. It gives an idea about the source of a particular attack. An administrator gets to know everything, which helps in understanding the things that need to be done or protected in the organization. Based on this information, an administrator can decide what needs to open or allowed in the network. Without EDR, Intercept X is like an antivirus, and the administrator won't get to know the things going on at the organizational level. I recommend purchasing an EDR solution for every organization."
"It is easy to interact with, and its cost is also good."
"This solution offers very good performance and it has great features."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"The interface is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"The tool provides automated responses."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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"
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"If Sophos Intercept allows users to restrict website access based on specific needs, such as streaming new videos for business purposes, we would prefer to use that."
"The policies could be nicer to manage."
"The pricing could be a bit lower to match the normal retail pricing."
"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."
"As for improvement, more notifications or emails about what to watch out for globally would be nice. For instance, information about the spread of a current phishing campaign or ransomware would be very helpful. I find that I have to dig in the back to find out what is happening on the global scene for things to be aware of."
"Mobile device management is a challenging area, and it can be improved. Some areas in the DLP solution can also be improved. It has the DLP capability, but it is not an all-out DLP program. I would like to see them improve the DLP solution in terms of reporting and possibly network monitoring. Currently, they only do the reporting parts of it."
"The performance is very slow and should be faster."
"I recommend that Intercept X Endpoint should include a patch assessment feature. Various vendors offer virtual patching solutions, which could be a game-changer, especially for the financial sector where frequent service restarts are challenging. These solutions allow patching servers without the need for restarts. Incorporating these features into Intercept X Endpoint would enhance its effectiveness in securing endpoints and servers."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. 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 WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". 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 WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Vision One and Huntress. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. WatchGuard Threat 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.