We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection 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."The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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"
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The stability is very good."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It comes included with the Windows license."
"The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"The fact that it's from Microsoft, you don't have many false positives, unlike products from other vendors might have."
"It's a Microsoft product; it's easier to deploy this product than other options."
"The investigation aspect is the most useful. It's user friendly and has a good user interface."
"The most valuable feature is ransomware protection, which can detect malicious activity from IPs or a malicious payload in DLLs, or other things that can corrupt the system."
"The antivirus features are very useful."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"The support needs improvement."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution is not stable."
"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."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Localization is always a challenge, especially with new products you typically want. Solutions are designed to be deployed where the most licenses are being consumed, such as in the United States. They focus on US products, devices, and networks. Specialized deployments for other countries would allow for a smoother experience in transition."
"Its interface can be improved a little bit. We would like to have some sort of centralization. It should have something like a central server that is managing all the other clients. There are solutions from Kaspersky or ESET NOD32 that are really doing this kind of thing currently. We would like to see something similar from Microsoft."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by making the reporting faster. It takes some time to reflect back to the administration portal of what has been updated. For example, out of 100 Computers, approximately 90 computers received updates, but when you check the administration portal over one or two days, you will only see 75, even though 90 were updated."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is effective for validating work, but not ideal for investigations."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"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."
"A single dashboard would be a significant improvement."
"Lacks some additional integration."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection 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.