We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and Webroot Business 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."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 setup is pretty simple."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"We find the protection the solution provides valuable."
"I like its unified interface, which also helps you scan Outlook email, for example. Multiple products can be standardized across endpoints or the EDR solution, and the integrations with SIEMs."
"The features I found most valuable in Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security include anti-malware, spyware detection, firewall, network detection, and user behavior analytics. The solution also gives you a heads-up about operating system misconfiguration."
"What I appreciate most about Bitdefender are its web content filtering, blocking malicious sites, and its ability to thwart brute force attacks on open ports."
"I find Bitdefender to be very light. When we were using the other versions, users would complain that they would make the computers slow. But since we have deployed Bitdefender, we haven't had that."
"The product is a good standard security tool."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security has a lot of telemetry that allows me to really see what's going on with the device."
"When it comes to the web, according to our customers, this product stands out due to its superior performance compared to others."
"The ease of use of the centralized admin console is its best asset."
"It is excellent endpoint protection for mobiles that does everything it says it will."
"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."
"Speed"
"There aren't any features that really stand out — I just want it to keep malware out of my system. To date, I haven't had any malware in my system."
"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."
"The solution is very simple and straightforward to use."
"It monitors traffic and keeps us from getting ransomware or other viruses."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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."
"We had experienced a crash and had to reinstall it."
"The risk management tool does not have reporting, which I feel to be a huge mistake."
"My main concern is that it's a bit heavy for some devices. Like Kaspersky or McAfee, it uses more RAM or memory. Similar to that, it causes issues for users and their own resources, similar to that. If you deploy on old legacy devices with only 1GB of RAM, then it could be a problem."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"The dashboard can be improved."
"They've got all this training that's available, but it involves stuff that doesn't really encompass the solution as a whole."
"There is room for improvement in CPU utilization."
"It could be simplified a little bit for firewall rules and blocking specific IP addresses. It would be nice to have an option to upload a CSV or XLSX file of IP addresses to be blacklisted or to be able to specify a range as attempted logins from botnets and people attempting to access network accounts is an increasing issue across the board."
"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
"They should provide more information on the type of cyber attacks."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 28th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 35th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with HP Wolf Security, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Seqrite Endpoint Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, HP Wolf Security and CylancePROTECT. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Webroot Business 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.
