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.
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It is stable and scalable."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"You have endpoint security to keep your devices safe. That's the feature that we're interested in."
"What I found most valuable in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it's out-of-the-box, which brings more value to the customer. The technical support for the product is also one of the best parts, because it's good, in terms of the product knowledge of the technical engineers."
"We had Norton Antivirus before, and with Norton, we didn't have a way to centrally manage a lot of features. Defender allowed us to deploy it from our Office 365 admin console. That is probably the biggest thing that made us go with Defender."
"It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit."
"I like that it's easy to deploy because it already comes with Windows 10. Overall, it has all the features that we need. Easy to deploy, comes with updates, and comes with Windows updates. You don't have to really manage or update the signature."
"Defender works in the background monitoring the traffic for viruses."
"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"Detections could be improved."
"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"
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should include better automation that will make it faster to detect the latest threats happening across the world."
"In India at least, it seems to be a bit more expensive than other options."
"Threat intelligence has the potential for improvement, particularly by integrating more sources."
"Integrating this with third-party systems has some complexity involved."
"Sometimes the software doesn't work the way we expect it to, and in those cases, we can't communicate with a device because it may be infected."
"Integration with third-party vendors could be better. It would be better if it integrates with other protection solutions or other products outside of Microsoft. Nowadays, anti-virus protection doesn't really have to be planned as overall protection for your environment in terms of security. There are really different avenues that bad actors can take to wreak havoc on your machine."
"We'd like the stability to be better."
"The interface isn't necessarily intuitive to a nontechnical person. You can get stuck in the little endpoint security portal. Sometimes, if you uninstall a competitive product, the end user doesn't always know if it's running or if they're protected even though it's silently running. There could be a notification, widget, or something that's resident on the screen for at least a bit, especially if you're doing remote support. You want to talk them through it, but sometimes, we're not allowed to look at the PCs we support."
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.
