We compared Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Trend Micro Deep Security is praised for its patch management feature and comprehensive security options. However, it needs improvement in pricing, technical support, and various functionalities. On the other hand, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is commended for its user-friendly interface and strong security protection. Suggestions for enhancements include documentation, compatibility, and performance. The pricing and licensing for both products are considered average or on the expensive side, depending on the user's perspective. The customer service and support for both products have received mixed reviews, with some users finding them satisfactory and others mentioning room for improvement.
"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."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider."
"The product is fairly technologically advanced and near the top of the market right now."
"Easy to deploy, easy to use, and has a good detection rate."
"The blocking feature is the most valuable feature."
"It helps to improve our security for our mobile and VMware infrastructure. The remote tasks are great."
"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."
"The product can scale if you need it to."
"The security and vulnerability assessment features are valuable."
"The vulnerability scanning reduces false positives by quite a bit."
"Their support is good. They are responsive, which is nice."
"Some of the main features of this solution are it is reliable and can be used in small to large size businesses."
"There are a good signature set and a high rate of detection."
"It's easy to use and the interface is simple."
"For server security purposes, I like the product's firewall."
"In addition to providing our clients a view of what's happening in their data centers, it also does virtual patching in the data center. It enhances the security in the data center big time."
"Patch management is most valuable. The major selling point of Deep Security is that it is based on the cloud. Deep Security is for the servers and databases of data centers, and generally, for patch management, you have to shut down the machines, and then you have to restart them. So, they need shutdown time, which is a cost. Big enterprises don't want to shut down their database or their data center for any kind of patch. Deep Security creates a wall and downloads all patches. You install it on the cloud. So, it saves your server from any kind of intrusion or any kind of penetration, and whenever you get a chance or time, in six, eight, or nine months, you can physically download or install all those patches in one go. So, it saves you time. It also saves your shutdown time and keeps your data center safe."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"When we connect to the solutions' website they block out our VPN connection. This causes us some difficulties."
"We would like to see improved performance and faster deployment in the next release."
"We would like to know where attacks are coming from."
"The solution is very draining on the computers at certain moments in its operation, excluding the scanning periods that make the computer unusable until finished. It is a balance between economic protection and client machine performance to our users."
"There are some features built into Kaspersky that do not work at all, so we have to use other products instead."
"When I do a malware scan on my computer it takes a long while. This process could improve in the future. Additionally, the security could improve."
"When it comes to handling the expiration of licenses, the solution should give a company more time to set up a renewal. It happens too abruptly right now."
"Kaspersky and most other security products have a lot of modules. They recently added several new ones. You find yourself buying and deploying so many things. There are some modules that everyone uses, like, for example, the orchestration module. Instead of selling them separately, it would be better to have bundles or an all-in-one license."
"Trend Micro is not government certified or federal complaint. If they could become compliant/certified, this would make it easier for us to use it for our government projects."
"We want to see improved authentication."
"The support for email protection can be improved."
"The client can show as offline sometimes, and that becomes a bit difficult for troubleshooting. We end up basically redeploying the client. This is something that could be improved in the future."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It would be helpful if they could send emails notifying their users about the recommended upgraded versions to address the newly discovered vulnerabilities."
"I would like them to add EDR features, moving away from traditional signature-based anti-malware."
"The licensing structure could improve."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. 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 Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint.
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.