We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint vs 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: Cisco Secure Endpoint received more favorable ratings in every comparison category.
"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."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"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."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"It is a very stable program."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"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."
"The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. So, that's the most important feature for me."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."
"What I like most is the protection against phishing emails and anti-spam."
"I am using it for very simple purposes. It is perfect and quite effective. I have been using it for a while, and I have never had any virus infection, data leak, or other security breaches. It works fine for standalone purposes. If you log on to OneDrive, it has ransomware protection."
"It depends on the licensing. Most of the customers have got at least a 365 E3 license, and they can use most of the features of Windows 10 Defender. So, anyone who has got an enterprise license can start using those features. Some of the customers have got E5 licenses, and they can use all advanced features. Customers with E5 licenses use the advanced site protection (ATP) features and web content filtering without going via a proxy, which gives the benefit of replacing the proxy. They can get the benefit of MCAS and integration with Intune and the endpoint manager. It is a kind of single platform for all 365 technologies. It helps customers in managing everything through a unified portal."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"The fact that it's from Microsoft, you don't have many false positives, unlike products from other vendors might have."
"One of the main features is the solution is very light on resources and we do not have any problems with it."
"Technical support is good."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"Integration and dashboard are areas with certain shortcomings in Cisco Secure Endpoint."
"The integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"On the firewall level, they were lagging a little bit behind, but they are running up again. I have full trust in the new 3000 series of firewalls where we would also be able to look more into the traffic that we're monitoring and get more security layers in our services. That would definitely be a big step."
"We would like to have an API integration with a SIEM solution, because as far as I know, it currently hasn't yet been released."
"The technical support is very slow."
"I would like them to add whatever makes filtering more advanced in scanning and blocking for malware in emails."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by making the reporting faster. It takes some time to reflect back to the administration portal of what has been updated. For example, out of 100 Computers, approximately 90 computers received updates, but when you check the administration portal over one or two days, you will only see 75, even though 90 were updated."
"There is no behavior analytics for devices and endpoints. There is no behavior-based protection."
"In the next release, I would like to see better management reporting."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can use more advertising to promote their features."
"They should come up with pre-built inner workflows."
"The product itself does not necessarily need improvement, but the support and implementation of the product are the disaster cases."
"Defender's cloud integration could be improved."
"They should bring back the feature of a dedicated proxy device for communication to the cloud. As of now, all the agents are required to send the logs directly to the cloud. There should be a solution where you can put a proxy and all the logs are consolidated, like a forwarder."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 22 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 78 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "You can access all your security data and telemetry from a single pane of glass". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Intercept X Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Malwarebytes. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors and best EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.