We compared CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, CylancePROTECT is praised for its exceptional threat detection capabilities, customer service, positive ROI, and ease of use, while users highlight the need for improvements in detection capabilities and integration. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint stands out for its comprehensive threat protection, efficient system management, and incident response capabilities, with users also satisfied with customer service and ROI. Pricing, setup, and licensing are perceived positively for both products, with room for improvement in certain areas mentioned by users.
Features: CylancePROTECT stands out for its exceptional threat detection, zero-day attack prevention, easy implementation, low system impact, and comprehensive analytics. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat protection, real-time monitoring, efficient system management, user-friendly interface, seamless integration, and incident response capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for CylancePROTECT is described as minimal, straightforward, and hassle-free, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's setup process is deemed straightforward and doesn't require much effort., The ROI from CylancePROTECT was highly positive, delivering improved security measures, increased efficiency, and reduced costs. Users praised its user-friendly interface and fast deployment. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint was seen as positive with users expressing satisfaction with its performance, effectiveness in protecting against threats, ease of use, and real-time insights.
Room for Improvement: CylancePROTECT has room for improvement in detection capabilities, integration with other security tools, reporting and analytics functionalities, and user interface. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has areas for enhancement according to user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, the duration required to establish a new tech solution varies for both CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Some users for CylancePROTECT mentioned different timeframes for deployment and setup, while for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, users also had different timeframes but emphasized the importance of context., The customer service for CylancePROTECT is praised for exceptional assistance, personalized guidance, and resolving issues promptly. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides helpful, efficient, and prompt support with effective solutions.
The summary above is based on 98 interviews we conducted recently with CylancePROTECT and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"Even if an endpoint loses connection to the Internet, I know that endpoint is protected against 99.99% of the threats in the wild today."
"The most valuable features of CylancePROTECT are its powerful machine-learning capabilities and predictive intelligence."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"It's a very complete application. I have all the controls in one site. I can track emails, attacks, and threats, and I can research information. I really like this configuration because I have all the information in place."
"The biggest benefit to Windows Defender is that it is built-in to the operating system by Microsoft."
"The technical support from Microsoft is very good. We are part of the Microsoft Suite, and from being part of this we have consistent news regarding Microsoft Defender for Endpoint."
"We are a Microsoft shop, and Defender is a Microsoft solution that provides some security at a reasonable cost."
"Automatic scanning and cleaning of viruses is the best and most valuable feature helping this tool to thrive. If any viruses are found, they are cleaned automatically."
"The most valuable feature is that it comes with the package, so there is no additional installation of third-party software. It's also easy to use."
"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."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The product does not do a lot of reporting on what it is taking care of. Enhanced reporting would be a welcome improvement."
"The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use."
"The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information."
"The process of whitelisting a script that you want to be able to run can be a little bit difficult, or awkward."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"CylancePROTECT could be improved in its technical support and communication."
"The interface isn't necessarily intuitive to a nontechnical person. You can get stuck in the little endpoint security portal. Sometimes, if you uninstall a competitive product, the end user doesn't always know if it's running or if they're protected even though it's silently running. There could be a notification, widget, or something that's resident on the screen for at least a bit, especially if you're doing remote support. You want to talk them through it, but sometimes, we're not allowed to look at the PCs we support."
"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."
"If you have multi-cloud like Google and AWS, the native solutions are better for those particular cases."
"I would like to see improvement from a management perspective. We have had to depend on Intune for certain tasks."
"The product itself does not necessarily need improvement, but the support and implementation of the product are the disaster cases."
"In active mode, it's great that it gives you so much information, but it does record every keystroke so you have a lot of logs... that amount of data logging started to add up in the cost."
"The profiling method currently in use is not very user-friendly and has ample scope for improvement."
"The integration and effectiveness of email security could be better. It's already built-in to the solution and checks emails, scans the links they contain etc."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 27th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 39 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". 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". CylancePROTECT is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.