We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Elastic Security vs. McAfee Endpoint Security

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic Security vs. McAfee Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"I am really satisfied with the technical support.""It is a very stable program.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""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.""Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations.""Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us.""The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it.""One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"The stability of the solution is good."

More Elastic Security Pros »

"McAfee EndPoint Security has a lot of good features that work well if they are implemented properly.""The manageability of the product itself is its most valuable aspect. You have the underlying EPO, and on top of it, you can deploy the various components as you require. This is unlike other solutions like Symantec where you have to deploy everything or nothing. With this solution, you can choose to only deploy antivirus or only deploy a firewall, or only something else. I choose the components and that deployment is done through EPO. It makes manageability very flexible.""The most valuable features are the prevention layer that detects the signature value and prevents threats in the network.""This product has the capability to check a wide range of vulnerabilities and devices.""The endpoint protection and disk encryption features are the most valuable.""The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP).""It's easy to use and it's very powerful. It offers nice endpoint protection.""The most valuable feature is ease of use."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Pros »

Cons
"I would like more seamless integration.""The technical support is very slow.""I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products.""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.""The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.""We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment.""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.""The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"The solution could offer better reporting features."

More Elastic Security Cons »

"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product.""There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging.""The resolution time should be faster.""The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints.""It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. Their support is also not good and needs improvement.""We know that McAfee isn't the best antivirus and it can't protect us 100%, although we are okay with the level of protection that it gives us.""It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections.""I would like to see more integration with third-party products."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The price is very good.""The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost.""Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc.""In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement.""Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection.""There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

Information Not Available
"Pricing is reasonable and runs at a cost per user per year.""It is not that expensive. There is no additional cost. We got the entire bundle together.""The price of this product is good.""The price of McAfee is pretty similar to Symantec, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.""Its price is very high. It is higher than its competitors, and it should be less.""The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis.""Since the maintenance is done by our own team, the price of the subscription should really be cheaper.""We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
Top Answer: Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
Top Answer: The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: It depends on what you want to achieve. With McAfee ENS you have complete coverage through McAfee solutions, that is, it… more »
Top Answer: The package of protection that it provides is useful. It has antivirus, malware protection, VPN, and a whole bunch of… more »
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Total Protection for Endpoint, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, MCAFEE Complete Endpoint Protection
Learn More
Overview

Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

Endgame's converged endpoint security platform is transforming security programs - their people, processes and technology - with the most powerful endpoint protection and simplest user experience, ensuring analysts of any skill level can stop targeted attacks before information theft. Endgame unifies prevention, detection, and threat hunting to stop known and unknown attacker behaviors at scale with a single agent.

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection allows you to protect all of your devices with intelligent, collaborative security, in one easy-to-manage, integrated solution. Our integrated endpoint security framework helps remove redundancies, enables fast, proven performance and offers an architecture to align both current and future security investments. With a flexible choice of cloud-based or a local management console, security administrators also get true centralized management that simplifies ongoing tasks, deployment and monitoring.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about Elastic Security
Learn more about McAfee Endpoint Security
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Texas A&M, U.S. Air Force, NuScale Power, Martin's Point Health Care
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
Comms Service Provider6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider22%
Computer Software Company22%
Government17%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm24%
Computer Software Company16%
Government13%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider20%
Government8%
Manufacturing Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise52%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise43%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise40%
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic Security vs. McAfee Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Elastic Security is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 1 review while McAfee Endpoint Security is ranked 13th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 35 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 8.0, while McAfee Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "Good threat hunting and capability for AI chat-related queries with very good stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Endpoint Security writes "Protect your business against a wide variety of threats". Elastic Security is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Carbon Black CB Defense, whereas McAfee Endpoint Security is most compared with McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Elastic Security vs. McAfee Endpoint Security report.

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.