We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Seqrite Endpoint Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The stability is very good."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"There is a lot of documentation available online."
"The technical support from Fortinet and local vendors is good."
"It works well and the performance is good."
"Having a centralized console is a valuable feature. The Fortinet fabric is also very valuable where all different pieces talk together to secure our network and track the North, South, East, and West movement of files and data through our network."
"From Forticlient, the EMS, the central management is easy to use."
"The EMS server gives us good control and central management."
"You can scale the product."
"The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass, single point of management."
"The most valuable features of the solution are DLP, XDR, and EDR functionalities."
"The two valuable features are anti-ransomware and data loss protection."
"I like Seqrite's web protection features and external device control."
"The convenience has been great."
"The solution is stable."
"Endpoint Security's best features are inventory, asset management, and quick scanning."
"The overall performance of the server and the dashboard are the most interesting aspects of the solution."
"The solution's current features include antivirus, web filtering, file activity monitoring, PAM, firewall, IDS/IPS, and DLP. Though I'm not familiar with the whole solution, it is good."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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"
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"It has a horrible performance. It is one of the most unstable VPNs I have ever used."
"It would be nice to see more in hand features in terms of the DLP, so that the solution can be integrated with the DLP, as well as more reporting features on the end point."
"The solution could be more secure. I would like to see more safety features."
"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."
"We'd like to see a deployment wizard to help implementation become streamlined."
"FortiClient's encryption key could be stronger so that it's not broken too easily."
"It would be extremely useful to have an automatic updating feature."
"Compatibility issues between different versions."
"The solution needs to improve stability."
"Endpoint Security would be improved by adding DLP."
"The product or service could be improved by incorporating SIEM integrations to enable the collection of logs."
"The support offered by the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The cost of the solution can be improved."
"It should be able to detect and report any ransomware attack but currently, it doesn't detect and it doesn't report any."
"The pricing could be a bit lower."
"We are using Apple devices, and the advanced device control service doesn't work for M1 chips devices, like Apple MacBooks."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 84 reviews while Seqrite Endpoint Security is ranked 23rd in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 19 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Seqrite Endpoint Security is rated 7.4. 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 Seqrite Endpoint Security writes "Effectively detects malicious files and blocks sign-ins but needs integrations". 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 Seqrite Endpoint Security is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Intercept X Endpoint, Trend Micro Apex One and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Seqrite Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.