We performed a comparison between Aruba IntroSpect and Fidelis Elevate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"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."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"I haven't heard of any issues with stability."
"The most valuable feature is the end-user monitoring. If there is any abnormal behavior on the machine, the administrator will be alerted."
"Roaming feature, application control and firewall features."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"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 SIEM could be improved."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support is a little slow."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard, where you can get the information with a simple click."
"The packet analyzer needs improvement."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
Aruba IntroSpect is ranked 24th in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) while Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Aruba IntroSpect is rated 8.6, while Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Aruba IntroSpect writes "A straightforward setup for technical users and an overall good product". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". Aruba IntroSpect is most compared with Arista NDR, Cisco Secure Network Analytics, LogRhythm UEBA, Darktrace and SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, whereas Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and Darktrace. See our Aruba IntroSpect vs. Fidelis Elevate report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.