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

Compare F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection vs. McAfee Endpoint Security

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection vs. McAfee Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,382 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
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source.""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.""Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.""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.""The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration.""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 »

"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected.""F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."

More F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection Pros »

"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager.""There is a new feature where you can set thresholds for all the CPU consumption allowing for no consumption on the servers when the scans happen. It is a separate plugin or addon, and if we have it on all the virtual machines it automatically checks the resources, and based on that, it will schedule the scans. That is something that I have not seen in other antivirus solutions, such as Symantec.""It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment.""The performance is good.""The solution provides dashboard control, so we can centrally monitor the entire status of our organization.""The detection is great and the solution is constantly improving.""The most valuable feature is ease of use.""The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Pros »

Cons
"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.""...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal.""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.""We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way.""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 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.""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 GUI needs improvement, it's not good."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly.""But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."

More F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection Cons »

"The local technical support could be better.""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.""I would like to see more integration with third-party products.""The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly. There are multiple solutions and there is no clear line differentiating all of them. There is a centralized console where we manage everything but most of the administrators feel a little confused when it comes to managing multiple products from a single place.""We don't like the solution since it requires much memory consumption and consumes much CPU resources.""The initial setup isn't so easy. You need to know what you are doing.""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."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""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.""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.""In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement.""Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.""The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing.""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 »

"We pay a yearly licensing fee of about €20 per computer."

More F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Pricing is reasonable and runs at a cost per user per year.""McAfee's prices are flexible and can be quite competitive, although there are other solutions that are even more so.""Licensing is paid yearly.""I do licensing on an annual basis and this is what I always recommend to my clients over the monthly option.""We pay for the license on an annual basis.""The price of the solution is in the middle range compare to others and could be reduced. There are not any additional costs.""Its price is very high. It is higher than its competitors, and it should be less.""Its price is reasonable, but it could be made free."

More McAfee Endpoint Security Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
554,382 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 »
Top Answer: F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates.
Top Answer: My manager deals with the cost of the product and licenses. I'm pretty sure that everything we use is included in there… more »
Top Answer: Sometimes, F-Secure doesn't always work as well as we'd like when we're using the console to push out an update to… more »
Top Answer: The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy… more »
Top Answer: Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best.
Top Answer: People, naturally, go for a yearly license. I am happy with the pricing.
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
F-Secure Protection Service for Business
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.

F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is cloud-native, AI-powered endpoint protection that you can deploy instantly from your browser and manage easily from a single console. It integrates across all your endpoints, keeping your organization fenced in from modern attacks, ransomware, never-before-seen malware and Zero Day vulnerability exploits.

Endpoint Protection is part of F-Secure Elements, the one platform that delivers everything from vulnerability management and collaboration protection to endpoint protection; and detection and response - managed from a single security console. Use individual solutions for specific needs or get complete protection by combining them all.

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 F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection
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
Information Not Available
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 Provider40%
Computer Software Company32%
Healthcare Company5%
Manufacturing Company5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm24%
Computer Software Company16%
Government13%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider21%
Government8%
Manufacturing Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise51%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business38%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise42%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business37%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise39%
Find out what your peers are saying about F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection vs. McAfee Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,382 professionals have used our research since 2012.

F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 32nd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 2 reviews while McAfee Endpoint Security is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 37 reviews. F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0, while McAfee Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and very stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Endpoint Security writes "Protect your business against a wide variety of threats". F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Apex One and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas McAfee Endpoint Security is most compared with McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection vs. McAfee Endpoint Security report.

See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (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.