We performed a comparison between AppRiver Email Security and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Email Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's easy to use and user-friendly. Users can also easily release spam emails."
"They are very easy to use."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 has improved my organization's security. It makes it easier to manage the infrastructure without the help of third-party applications."
"Threat Explorer is one of the features that I very much like because it is a real-time report that allows you to identify, analyze, and trace security attacks."
"The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"I would say that 90% of the spam and phishing attack emails get blocked right off the bat."
"It also gives the vulnerability status according to the versions you have selected. Let's say you have Google Chrome. It mentions the versions it has, and it updates. Within two hours of an update, it is reflected in the dashboard. That's really nice to have."
"Does a thorough job of examining email and URLs for malicious content."
"It gives us visibility into threats and, for endpoints, it helps us to prioritize threats. We used to have a lack of visibility, but now our time to detect and respond has decreased."
"Email security checks contain a small number of false positives."
"It needs to make sure that the application is up to date with new attacks. They should also send us the demo or introductions for their new incoming features."
"There is room for improvement with the UI."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"The product must provide better malware detection."
"They can improve their security in a way where a customer can know if all their attachments are safe or not to open through a report. The solution does its job perfectly, but it never reports to the customer whether those attachments have been stopped before or not."
"The UI needs to be more user-friendly."
"The custom alerts have to improve a lot."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. It depends on the architecture, but we would like to make it more scalable for both data centers."
"Microsoft wants its well-paying customers to finish testing some of its half-baked products, find bugs, and report bugs back to Microsoft's team, which is a little frustrating for those who have to manage it and roll it up to thousands of people across the organization."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppRiver Email Security is ranked 23rd in Email Security with 2 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is ranked 1st in Email Security with 41 reviews. AppRiver Email Security is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AppRiver Email Security writes "Pricing that is competitive, excellent technical support, and email security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Office 365 writes "Allows for easy reporting of problems, valuable anti-phishing, and anti-malware support". AppRiver Email Security is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Avanan and Proofpoint Email Protection, whereas Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection, Mimecast Email Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Cisco Secure Email and IRONSCALES. See our AppRiver Email Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Office 365 report.
See our list of best Email Security vendors.
We monitor all Email Security 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.