We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Kaspersky Endpoint Security comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing with a good interface and has excellent customer support. Defender for Endpoint did come out on top in the Ease of Deployment category.
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The product is fairly technologically advanced and near the top of the market right now."
"It provides good security."
"Kaspersky Enterprise solution's combined protections have helped to block a lot of malware which would have caused a lot of interruptions in our operations."
"It allows for a solid form of risk management as well as a measure of remote device management."
"First of all, I like that it's perfect against malware threats and behavior analysis along with signature analysis. That's the key point for me."
"It's easy to use."
"The failure rate is very low."
"The implementation and integration are easy."
"It performs well. The stability is seamless."
"I like that Defender is integrated and doesn't have a third-party payload trying to advertise subscription renewal."
"The best part is that it is built into Windows, whether it is a server base or a desktop base, which gives more control over the operating system. Because Defender, the operating system, and the Office solution are by Microsoft, everything is working like hand-in-glove. Its administrative overhead is less because a desktop user has already got some experience of how to handle a Microsoft Defender notification or administer it."
"The intelligence mechanisms are good."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable."
"Provides good security features and you can view it in the central console."
"Endpoint's most valuable feature is deep analysis."
"Defender is stable. The performance is good."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Detections could be improved."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"This solution would be improved if it were more compatible with Windows Server. There is not a client for Windows Server, like for Windows Workstation, so there are a lot of things you cannot control from the local system, or from the desktop directly. You have to control everything from the policy server, not from the client's side. The interface is kind of light, and it's not good—it could be more user-friendly."
"The need to re-engineer the source code to reduce CPU and memory usage. Other areas for improvement include a data-loss prevention solution, enhanced application control, enhanced device control, an endpoint encryption solution, an advanced persistent threats (APT) solution, and an all-in-one solution with one pricing scheme for corporate and enterprise business needs."
"The GUI mode in the product is an area with certain shortcomings since it looks old with the graphics provided by Kaspersky."
"It would be beneficial to have more robust cloud management capabilities for Endpoint."
"Maybe the solution's monitoring could be improved with more dashboards, so there's no back and forth, back and forth."
"I've had some problems with the web interface. For example, when I was running a trace, it's difficult to find this function, but I can see it when I go on the server. So, if I want to implement the EDR functions on the web interface, it's very difficult because the command button or the link doesn't appear."
"There should be some AI involved. We already have machine learning involved in recent releases but machine learning should be more enhanced in the upcoming versions."
"I'd like to see them improve encryption and remote management in the future. Kaspersky could also improve its scanning technology. Other solutions have adopted machine learning and deep learning, but Kaspersky still uses signature-based scanning."
"The central console needs improvement. Both McAfee and Symantec antivirus have dashboards. These integrate with a server and work on my antivirus or some other product. However, with Microsoft Defender, you use Microsoft Group Policy Object. Defender does not provide a central console. Therefore, if you implement Defender, then maybe use another tool for the central view."
"A challenge is that it is not a multi-tenant solution. Microsoft's tenant is a licensed tenant. I'm an MSSP. So, I have multiple customers. In Microsoft's world, that means that I can't just buy an E5 license and give that out to all my customers. That won't work because all of the customer data resides within a single tenant in Microsoft's world. Other products—such as SentinelOne, Palo Alto Cortex, CrowdStrike, et cetera—are multi-tenant. So, I can have it at the top of the pyramid for my analyst to look into it and see all the customers, but each customer's data is separate. If the customer wants to look at what we see, they would only see their data, whereas in the Microsoft world, if I've got multiple customers connected to the same Microsoft tenant, they would see everybody else's data, which is a privacy problem in Europe. It is not possible to share the data, and it is a breach of privacy."
"I would like to have additional features such as DNS lookup, which would help for detecting malicious sites."
"Additional security would be beneficial."
"Defender could be more secure and stable."
"It would be nice to have a paid upgrade that would provide additional screening of the day-to-day activities."
"We would like to see more tools for managing on-premises security... Sometimes, we have the tools, like Defender, to manage security in the cloud, but because we are so focused on the cloud, we forget the fact that we need to be sure about the security of the on-premises environment, specifically Active Directory."
"The integration and effectiveness of email security could be better. It's already built-in to the solution and checks emails, scans the links they contain etc."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". On the other hand, 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.