We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Panda Adaptive Defense 360 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Blackberry Protect offers endpoint protection. It's easy to deploy. It's scalable and stable."
"Has good RAM capacity for the power I need"
"The deployment of updates is easy."
"The CylancePROTECT agent is very low on CPU usage, so it has virtually no adverse impact on my servers, desktops, or workstations."
"Does malware analysis. Blocks WannaCry and other attacks that have come out."
"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 solution is pretty easy to scale."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent."
"We have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic."
"The feature I find most valuable is the advance search engine."
"The most valuable feature of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is we don't have to have dedicated infrastructure on-premise because it is cloud-based."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter application control."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its device control."
"It is easy to manage."
"It prevents our users from circumventing security. Everything is password protected so they can't get into it. They can't uninstall it. They can't do anything."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution is not stable."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"Additionally, their channel management has been lacking, with a notable disregard for small and medium-sized businesses, focusing primarily on large enterprises and very large MSPs."
"The initial deployment was quite complicated."
"The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"It needs real analysis of quarantined files. The EDR product isn't showing much right now."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions. This is the industrial environment where you have a control center for all the automation that's happening, whether it is oil, gas, or chemical manufacturing. They often have to set up a computer at the back and watch the other stuff to get alerts. In these autonomous or on-premises environments, they often don't have access to email readily. Integration with other industrial solutions, such as HMIS, will allow them to communicate and get an alert that something has been found. This way, they can react to it sooner than having somebody watch the screen and keep checking the screen. Rockwell has its own suite. Similarly, Honeywell has its own suite. There's also an independent HMI/historian solution provider out there called VTSCADA. We actually get asked if we can get it to show up on a screen, which is difficult. Getting those alerts to work within an industrial environment would be a huge plus."
"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."
"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."
"We do get the odd false positive when we're trying to install the software."
"The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system."
"The implementation was difficult."
"They need to expand their offering of add-ons to enhance capabilities further."
"Their MacOS support isn't that good."
"Improvements could be made in terms of how the reporting is structured."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 28th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 37 reviews while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is ranked 19th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 25 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is rated 8.2. 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 Panda Adaptive Defense 360 writes "Managing multiple machines is a pain, but support is top notch". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Malwarebytes. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.