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.
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"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."
"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"
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"One of the strengths of Harmony is its power to detect threats and keep us safe."
"The product is stable."
"The real-time threat prevention capabilities stand out as a fortress against malware, ransomware, and evolving cyber threats, offering a proactive defense that safeguards our organization's critical assets."
"It is integrated with a cloud platform that takes advantage of many emulation features in real-time filtering of malicious attacks."
"Check Point Harmony Endpoint features different types of features but one of the most useful is an up-to-date and working anti-malware scanner."
"Harmony's endpoint sandboxing is really good."
"The zero-day threat prevention is excellent."
"This software incorporates security AI features and effectively manages bandwidth with its DRS capabilities."
"We can react to threats faster and stop them from spreading from one machine to another. It protects from suspicious email attachment downloads. It will lock down the SOC and the workstations."
"It automatically detects intrusion and malware."
"One of the features which differentiates it from other EDR providers is the Automated Investigation and Response, which reduces the workload of SOC analysts or engineers. They don't have to manually investigate each and every alert on the endpoint, since it does so automatically. And you can automate the investigation part."
"Offers good protection."
"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."
"Microsoft Defender can block some viruses or malware. So, it can protect my files. It can save files on Office 365 OneDrive. I use encryption for some files, then I can recover them from OneDrive."
"The solution has good performance, I have not seen a problem."
"We found that because the endpoint devices are based on Microsoft Windows devices and Windows Defender is integrated with the foundation and the core layer, it makes it more integrated and more agile in terms of responding to any security threats or changes or development"
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Detections could be improved."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I would like to see simple sandboxing for malware analysis."
"I still don't have a clear opinion of the possible improvements that the tool may need. There are still functionalities that I have not been able to try completely and I would like to spend more time using the tool before offering an opinion to the IT Central community on this point."
"It gives you an alert for malicious sites, which, after searching on the Google database, don't come out to be the same."
"They could improve memory consumption."
"The solution can be made lightweight in order to keep the systems more effective during the background operations of the scanning and security checks."
"If the IT department is used to "cloning" endpoints (making images) you are going to have a hard time trying to install the product and you are going to end up reading a lot of Check Point documents."
"Support's service and the response times can be improved. The triaging of the tickets takes a long time and the tickets are only resolved with escalations."
"They could be focused on the analysis of USB devices."
"The end-user also cannot do some advanced actions on it. It's a little bit complicated for our end-user, so it needs to be simplified."
"The scanning is slow when it is working with incoming emails."
"It would be nice to have a paid upgrade that would provide additional screening of the day-to-day activities."
"Cortex... has good investigation capabilities, out-of-the-box, in case there is an event that you'd like to investigate. It's quite convenient. Microsoft has those capabilities as well, but you need a bit more training on the product to get the basic information that you can get out-of-the-box with Cortex."
"The frequency of the patching, and the frequency of the updates, are not included with the free version."
"There's scanning going on that occasionally topples the memory, causing everything to freeze. This should be fixed."
"We need better support to learn about the product. Documentation is available, but we need some kind of training program so that we can get a better understanding of the product."
"I would like to see improvement from a management perspective. We have had to depend on Intune for certain tasks."
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.