We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Fortinet FortiClient 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."The stability is very good."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"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."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"I am told that we get over 100 million emails a month. This filters them down and allows only somewhere about three million emails, which is a great help."
"It used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its integration capabilities. The processing is fast and the reporting is also very good."
"The integration capabilities are good."
"Starting from FortiGate and from the EMS server, you have to begin at the endpoint, and that's the most useful thing about using FortiClient."
"The setup for FortiClient is really straightforward."
"Remote connectivity is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy."
"The solution is very scalable. It just depends on the number of licenses an organization has. The enterprise management console is related to the number of clients, and the client interface itself is free to download."
"There is a lot of documentation available online."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"Detections could be improved."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution is not stable."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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"
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"It could be improved in connection with artificial intelligence and IoT."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"In terms of improvements, their SSL VPN tunnel can be a lot better. I've seen other products that have got much better VPN features than Fortinet. Some of my colleagues get this error called "License not available." When they get this error, they have to uninstall and reinstall it. This kind of problem is there, and sometimes, we have to open a case with Fortinet to resolve it. Their support is quick, so we are able to resolve and move forward. In terms of new features, when it is connecting, it should check the endpoint and say whether the end client is actually safe enough or whether there is a vulnerability. It should give a pop-up on the client itself. Because I'm on the admin side, I can also see this information in the log. However, if a non-IT user, such as a user from finance, is working on this and there is some problem, he or she would not know about this and would call IT admin to say that this is not working. If the users get a message explaining why and what is happening, it is easy for them to understand."
"The solution could add data to the endpoint."
"It would be extremely useful to have an automatic updating feature."
"The features for application control and device control must be improved."
"I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication."
"We'd like to be able to properly encrypt the data more effectively."
"With Fortinet, some clients have to wait two to four days for a response. That is the biggest complaint from end customer about Fortinet's technical support."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 43 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Single dashboard management, quick infrastructure threat detection, and high level support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fortinet FortiClient 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.