We compared Fortinet FortiEDR and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Fortinet FortiEDR requires improvements in user interface, setup process, documentation, and reporting capabilities. Users appreciate its threat detection capabilities and customer service. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint features comprehensive threat protection, real-time monitoring, and efficient incident response. Users praise its customer service, pricing, and effectiveness in threat detection but suggest some areas for improvement. Overall, Fortinet FortiEDR focuses on enhancements in usability and reporting, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint emphasizes comprehensive threat protection and real-time monitoring.
Features: Fortinet FortiEDR is praised for its advanced threat detection, seamless integration, and user-friendly interface. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat protection, real-time monitoring, and effective incident response capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Fortinet FortiEDR is reported to be straightforward and hassle-free, requiring minimal effort. Customers also appreciate the flexibility of licensing options that allow them to choose the most suitable model. Similarly, with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, users found the pricing reasonable, setup process straightforward, and licensing options flexible for different organizational needs., Fortinet FortiEDR offers a positive ROI based on user feedback. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has a positive ROI, with users praising its performance, effectiveness, and real-time insights.
Room for Improvement: Fortinet FortiEDR could benefit from improvements in user interface, ease of use, setup process, documentation, training resources, reporting capabilities, and dashboards. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has areas for enhancement according to user feedback.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user reviews, the implementation duration for Fortinet FortiEDR varies, with some users taking three months for deployment and a week for setup. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has varying reviews, with some users taking three months for deployment and a week for setup. It is important to consider the context in which these timeframes are mentioned., Customers have reported positive experiences with the customer service of both Fortinet FortiEDR and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. However, Fortinet is praised for its excellent assistance and guidance, while Microsoft is commended for the helpfulness, efficiency, and promptness of their support team.
The summary above is based on 106 interviews we conducted recently with Fortinet FortiEDR and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It is stable and scalable."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been secure and there is zero maintenance required because it updates with Microsoft Windows."
"The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been good."
"For threat-hunting, I'll put some threats in a test scenario. I've downloaded known viruses that are out in the public for testing. They're not really a virus but they've got a signature. Defender for Endpoint will automatically find those, quarantine them for me, and alert me to what it did. It gives me "automated eyes.""
"It's a Microsoft product; it's easier to deploy this product than other options."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable."
"The most valuable feature is ransomware protection, which can detect malicious activity from IPs or a malicious payload in DLLs, or other things that can corrupt the system."
"It's a very complete application. I have all the controls in one site. I can track emails, attacks, and threats, and I can research information. I really like this configuration because I have all the information in place."
"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution is not stable."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"There are alternative solutions that offer a greater range of dashboard insights when compared to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint."
"Microsoft should improve support for third-party platforms, because not all functionality is available for all of them. It's a good product, but they should just extend the functionality for all platforms."
"They can improve it on the online protection front since people nowadays are moving online and working from home."
"My main issue with the tool is that there are too many menus. This causes a steep learning curve for those without training or unfamiliar with Defender for Endpoint. From an end-user perspective, the solution is there on the machine and does its job; it works seamlessly. However, as a security professional dealing with it behind the scenes, the learning curve can be steep, but not too steep. Still, it has taken some of my analysts up to a month to get familiar with the product."
"Cortex... has good investigation capabilities, out-of-the-box, in case there is an event that you'd like to investigate. It's quite convenient. Microsoft has those capabilities as well, but you need a bit more training on the product to get the basic information that you can get out-of-the-box with Cortex."
"It could be easier when it comes to managing exceptions."
"I would like to have a dashboard that shows an overview of the results for the enterprise."
"There is no behavior analytics for devices and endpoints. There is no behavior-based protection."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 13th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 30 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "A proactive solution that works as a proactive upgrade from a firewall". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Fortinet FortiEDR vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.
