We performed a comparison between SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cisco Secure Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: SentinelOne Singularity Complete is praised for its dependable threat prevention and ability to reverse ransomware file encryption. Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its threat-hunting capabilities, sandboxing, and swift response to attacks. Users also praised the solution's seamless integration with Talos for continuous protection. SentinelOne could improve its automation, machine learning, and AI capabilities while improving reporting and integration. Cisco Secure Endpoint could benefit from more scenario-based information and a simpler, more customizable main dashboard. Integration with artificial intelligence and IoT is another area for improvement.
Service and Support: Customers have been pleased with SentinelOne’s customer service. Reviews highlighted the support team’s responsiveness and efficiency. Users said Cisco support is efficient and responsive, and customers also found it easy to find answers in the documentation without help. Some users recommend enhancing training programs and streamlining management consoles to further enhance the level of support provided.
Ease of Deployment: Users find the initial setup for SentinelOne Singularity Complete to be quick and painless, with helpful support from the vendor team. Setting up Cisco Secure Endpoint is generally considered to be straightforward, but some users reported challenges related to agent behavior and configuration. The initial installation involves downloading an agent and installing it on endpoints, and the total deployment time ranged from a week to several months.
Pricing: Some reviewers thought SentinelOne Singularity Complete is reasonably priced and competitive, while others say it’s costlier than many alternatives. Cisco Secure Endpoint's pricing is also seen as fair, though some users requested additional discounts, particularly for educational purposes.
ROI: SentinelOne Singularity Complete yields an ROI by saving money and protecting against ransomware attacks. Other users noted its valuable dashboard data and low CapEx requirements. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers cost savings and the potential to earn money by extending services.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer SentinelOne Singularity Complete over Cisco Secure Endpoint. Users commended SentinelOne for its reliable threat resolution and valuable features including automated threat remediation and comprehensive event data analysis. Users found the pricing reasonable and reported positive customer service experiences.
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The product provides sandboxing options like file reputation and file analysis."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"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."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The customer support for this solution is good."
"The solution offers very rich details surrounding threats or attacks."
"It is great for security monitoring and blocking when needed."
"The Deep Visibility feature is the most useful part of the EDR platform. It gives us good insights into what is actually happening on the endpoints, e.g., when we have malicious or suspicious activity. We came from a legacy type AV previously, so we didn't have that level of visibility or understanding. For simplifying threat-hunting, it is extremely useful, where traditional techniques in threat hunting are quite laborious. We can put in indicators of compromise and it will sweep the environment for them, then they would give us a breakdown of what assets have been seen and where they have been seen, which is more of a forensics overview."
"The user interface, ease of maintenance, and the efficient way to identify the root cause of an incident to see all the factors that contributed to it are the most valuable features."
"It seamlessly integrates with other solutions, providing a high level of compatibility and effectiveness."
"SentinelOne has helped us to improve our security by fine-tuning our current use cases and creating new ones."
"The deep visibility and the ability to perform security investigations and assess our endpoint security posture are the most valuable features."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"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."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"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."
"Due to the complexity of the technology that is used and its advanced threat detection capabilities, it is possible to encounter many delays in operation."
"Its price is okay for us, but it can always be better. There's always room for improvement when it comes to pricing."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"An easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"One of the areas which would benefit from being improved is the policies. There are still software programs where we need to manually program in the policies to tell the system, "This program is legitimate." Some level of AI-based automation in creating those policies would go a long way in improving the amount of time it takes to deploy the system."
"The solution can improve by adding more granular firewall capabilities."
"The solution should include USB blocking for specific machines."
"The previous vendor had a lot more features and capabilities under the license. For example, I lost DLP as Sentinel One does not have DLP."
"The improvement could be in terms of reducing more noise and continuing to cut that down. AI seems to be the big thing with Purple. We are excited to get our hands on that."
"I would like to improve the reports because they are not so customizable and we would like more info from them."
"It's fine. It's correcting all the EFC files with a virus. All the achievements, maximum EFC files. Many EFC files will be flagged as a virus. Some virus databases need to be updated. The model is good at finding many EFC files. The trouble is it needs to be updated."
"The role-based access is in dire need of improvement. We actually discussed this on a roadmap call and were informed that it was coming, but then it was delayed. It limits the roles that you can have in the platform, and we require several custom roles. We work with a lot of third-parties whom we rely on for some of our IT services. Part of those are an external SOC function where they are over-provisioned in the solution because there isn't anything relevant for the level of work that they do."
More SentinelOne Singularity Complete Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 43 reviews while SentinelOne Singularity Complete is ranked 2nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 176 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while SentinelOne Singularity Complete is rated 8.8. 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 SentinelOne Singularity Complete writes "Provides peace of mind and is good at ingesting data and correlating". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas SentinelOne Singularity Complete is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, ThreatLocker Protect and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. SentinelOne Singularity Complete 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.
