We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Fortinet FortiEDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"It has been scalable."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"Technical support could be better."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"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 solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
Digital Guardian is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 11 reviews while Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 13th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 30 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "A proactive solution that works as a proactive upgrade from a firewall". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Digital Guardian vs. Fortinet FortiEDR report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.