We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiEDR and Fortinet FortiClient based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Fortinet FortiEDR comes out ahead of Fortinet FortiClient. Fortinet FortiClient's initial setup can take time, and the deployment is more challenging, especially when remote access is required. Fortinet FortiClient's pricing depends on the licenses needed, which may make it more expensive in some cases.
"What I like most about FortiClient is that it's easy to use. The way it displays information is very straightforward."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's easy to install and connect and has OTP on email IDs and two-factor authentication."
"EMS central reporting with fabric connectivity to FortiGate and FortiAnalyser is great and has seamless integration which makes managing 3000 devices a breeze."
"The technical support from Fortinet and local vendors is good."
"It is very easy and useful. A normal user with basic information can easily connect to any environment."
"It is a feature-rich product that is easy to use and install without sacrificing security."
"The VPN connection is the feature that I like the most."
"It seems to be more scalable than we thought."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The solution requires skillful users."
"The documentation could be improved."
"Working with Distribution sometimes comes at a cost due to a lack of knowledge of the current status of your licensing and products."
"There isn't much to improve in terms of features and comparison with other vendors. It just needs to stay more up to date in catching the malware. The user interface may be improved, which would be a minor enhancement. Unlike central management, in endpoint security, the end users don't need to keep looking at the endpoint user interface. The technology is the most important thing in endpoint security."
"When we change our endpoint, we have to connect again, which means having to enter our credentials and permissions."
"While I cannot think of new features to add, it would be nice if the reports were improved, to have these sent automatically."
"The filtering process could be improved."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"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."
"Detections could be improved."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews while Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 13th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 30 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "A proactive solution that works as a proactive upgrade from a firewall". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform.
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.