We performed a comparison between BigFix and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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."Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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 patching."
"From a security standpoint, it allows us to make sure that we're not leaving ourselves vulnerable to exploits and things like that. That's the biggest advantage that we see to the product from a security standpoint."
"It's very straightforward."
"We are able to go from patching thousands of machines by twenty to thirty people to one person."
"BigFix is easy to use."
"The most valuable point is when you deploy an application, you have to make sure that the application has been deployed to all computers and that is working perfectly. This solution works well at deployments."
"In terms of vulnerability management, it gives tough competition by providing a single management console with multiple benefits."
"The most valuable and essential features of BigFix are all of them, they are needed when serving the purpose of the desktop operation framework. We cannot run operations without patching or without having an appropriate mechanism for deploying software, et cetera. The features all serve their purpose for our use case."
"I am impressed with the tool's main dashboard, anti-malware application blocking, DDoS, etc."
"Our clients are using the advanced options, and they're quite comfortable with this solution because they didn't have any problems. It was easy to integrate it with Active Directory. It is fast and easy to use. It has all the required features."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its deployment. It is easy to centrally deploy. You can deploy it on the Administration Console then deploy it to the different endpoint machines without specifically deploying it manually on each machine. Its deployment is really user friendly."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the firewall, the IPS, and the patch deployment."
"The performance is good. It doesn't use a lot of resources, which is crucial for us."
"Antivirus, including anti-spam, trojan, and worm detection and prevention. Kaspersky has a comprehensive virus definition update which is very helpful for threat prevention."
"I like that we can use it across all the platforms like PC, Mac, Linux, iOS, and all systems for protection. I also like that we can use it for different cloud sessions and different unified systems. It's available on all the vulnerability assessments including, web filtering, email filtering, test protection, anomaly control, and management. There are more than enough benefits available on Kaspersky."
"The tool's interface is good."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Detections could be improved."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution should have some kind of a local caching methodology, where the patches can be taken locally into a localized relay server, and from there, the patch can be applied, so that there is not much usage of the network required."
"The remote software installation could be better."
"I would like to see different types of reporting and the ability to integrate closer with the cloud."
"We need a much better multi-tenant option."
"I would like to see SDK for Web UI included in the next release."
"The scalability of the web UI product doesn't scale to the size that we need for our implementation so it needs to expand. I would also like to see the capability to develop on the back of the web UI capability. There are lots of web features and integrations that we could do with web UI that it would be nice to be able to put on top of what's already there, rather than waiting for IBM to develop what we need."
"Sometimes the workstations communicate back to the BigFix server two or three days in a week or something similar. Sometimes there can be a delay reporting back to the server for a variety of reasons, such as users turning their computer off when they go home. When the user comes back and turns the computer back on BigFix needs to synchronize and sometimes it can take some time, approximately one week. The communication between the agent and the server should be faster, there is room for improvement in this area."
"Maybe the online help could be improved. It'd be nice if you would have a lot more phrases and keywords that you could search for and find answers with the help."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"They're restricted to endpoint protection for now, I'd like to see some additional products."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business’s interface could be easier to understand when displaying the activities during configuration processes."
"The solution sometimes slows down the computers of our clients, the performance needs to improve."
"Reaching their support team can be difficult."
"There are many improvements needed, such as faster responses, faster notification, and immediate reports."
"It is expensive, it could be cheaper, so I think the solution's pricing could be better."
"I'd like Kaspersky to be more stable and secure."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
BigFix is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 91 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 110 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Tanium and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security. See our BigFix vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.