We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and Panda Adaptive Defense 360 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."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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"
"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."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"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."
"Their endpoint is pretty flawless. There is no lag on the machines at all. Even though I have a good overview of all the machines, that's pretty much the most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon."
"There's almost no maintenance required. It's very low if there's any at all."
"The stability is very good."
"The threat intelligence is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is that we don't need to re-image machines as much as we had to."
"It has an extremely low footprint, so it has got minimum impact on the user end points in terms of CPU and memory usage."
"Falcon's best feature is its detection and blocking of threats."
"The ability to execute real-time response, or, that you can connect to the agent and see exactly what processes are operating, is the most important feature of this solution."
"We have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"Great technical support staff."
"Their remote management (RMM) is very good."
"It is easy to manage."
"I've found it's got excellent web protection."
"The interface is great."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"The technical support team often just replies to an issue with a link to an article rather than actually calling back and talking to someone and making sure the problem is solved. To me, that's kind of weak."
"The dashboard does not have the facility to export the reports in a PDF format, which I can quickly share with internal stakeholders."
"We sometimes get false positives."
"I would like them to improve the correlation of data in the search algorithms. When we run an investigation, malware, phishing, etc., I want to look at multiple endpoints at once to correlate that data to see the likenesses, e.g., how are they not alike or what systems and processes are running across those systems? I don't want to have to run the same search in their Spotlight module five, 10, 15, or 100 times to get 100 different results, copy that data out, and then correlate it on my own. In a very simple way, I want to be able to load up a comma-delimited list giving me the spotlight data on these X amount of hosts, letting me search for it quickly. We have had to go back to CrowdStrike, and say, "Our search are taking far too long for even one host." They did bump up the cores and that did improve performance, but it is still kind of slow to get that Spotlight data. That is probably our biggest pain point. I think that needs some help. I understand this kind of information access is probably not the easiest thing to do. It is probably a big ask depending on how their back-end is setup."
"In the future release of CrowdStrike Falcon, they should add a sandbox feature."
"I would like to see a more accurate integration and an option to check the local machine."
"CrowdStrike should add support for ransomware protection."
"Falcon could include more integrative features."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense can improve by including the intrusion and prevention system not only on their most expensive platform. Additionally, it blocks software that is legitimate from users. They complain and then we have to manually unblock the software, by hash, or we receive a message. Some of the prevention features are not available and this might cause us to need a separate firewall or something to protect the company."
"We do get the odd false positive when we're trying to install the software."
"The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe."
"The implementation was difficult."
"The stability could be improved. My teammates who use Panda Security and I have experienced some issues."
"The only part I really don't use as much is their firewall. It's a bit superfluous. Most people have their own firewall in place, so they don't really need that part portion of the solution."
"Their MacOS support isn't that good."
"Needs a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether it's valid."
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 105 reviews while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 25 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 writes "Managing multiple machines is a pain, but support is top notch". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Malwarebytes. See our CrowdStrike Falcon vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 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.