We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint 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: Check Point Harmony has a slight edge in this comparison. According to its reviewers, its interface is friendlier than that of Defender for Endpoint.
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"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 stability is very good."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"They have a great knowledge base that you can leverage as a user."
"It's pretty complete for preventing threats to endpoints. Its capabilities are great."
"Cost-wise it's cheaper than other options."
"SandBlast Agent is always working in the background collecting sensitive data, forensics, and notifying users whenever there is a chance of a brute-force attack into our systems. Otherwise, it has been protecting our data at various geographies along with the endpoints that we set up on the cloud. They have been able to filter out or thwart any attacks from the very word, "Go," and make our work very safe and smooth."
"Its ease of use is the most valuable feature. We had existing endpoints and it was an easy upgrade process. The interface board is also easy to use."
"We now feel more secure with our PCs, even more with the non-technical persons."
"One of the coolest features is that it provides an HTML report on the laptop and the endpoint console for the administrator."
"The license plans are also very nice and distributed - allowing for a separation between types of users with more basic or more advanced options."
"A few years ago, when I was using a different product, I was affected by a virus that destroyed everything. Since using Microsoft Defender, I have not had this kind of problem."
"The solution's main antivirus capabilities are okay. So far, they have kept us safe."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is free and part of the licensing stack of other Microsoft products."
"Defender works in the background monitoring the traffic for viruses."
"Because it has been integrated with the OS, we get the entire software inventories, and we even get access to the registries. Those are the primary features."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite good. We haven't really experienced any issues with it."
"One feature I like the most is vulnerability management, which shows any vulnerable software or OS present in my environment. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a complete overview and also recommends the steps to mitigate the vulnerabilities or threats. Most of the other antivirus or EDR solutions generally don't provide vulnerability management. It is an add-on that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides."
"Easy to understand and easy to set up endpoint security solution. It's a multifeatured product with web content filtering and automated investigation features. It also has a fantastic vulnerability management dashboard."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"There are still functionalities that I have not been able to fully test and I would like to spend more time using the tool before offering an opinion to the IT Central community on this point."
"The web filter service could be improved."
"We know that Check Point has a very good database about threats even Check Point tries to make this EDR stable still there are some issues we were facing after upgrading or taking TAC to help its got resolved but Check Point really needs to work on metadata."
"The heartbeat interval must be improved."
"I would like to see simple sandboxing for malware analysis."
"Unfortunately, the web (cloud) management system and log search performance are quite bad."
"Off the top of my head, I can't think of a way it has improved my organization."
"Sometimes the portal loads slowly which should be improved."
"The solution could always be more secure."
"Phishing and Malware detection could be better."
"The time to generate certain alerts on our dashboard can take between 45 minutes to an hour, and I am unsure of the factors that influence this duration."
"The solution should be updated by Microsoft with new features from time to time."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by providing more and different types of reports."
"Some of the integrations that Defender should include involve the use of the web app."
"Where we stand right now, compared to other products that are there in the market, they still have to work on their threat intelligence and the overall maturity of detecting the malware."
"There's scanning going on that occasionally topples the memory, causing everything to freeze. This should be fixed."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". 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". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Trend Micro Apex One. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint 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.