We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"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"
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The Managed Detection and Response service provided by Intercept X Endpoint is highly valuable. With a team of 600-700 individuals monitoring systems, they swiftly respond to attacks, either informing us to isolate or directly removing threats. This full MDR service is especially recommended for sectors like finance, where data security is critical. The deep learning technology within Intercept X Endpoint enhances our security posture by analyzing behaviors and algorithms to differentiate between legitimate users and threats, effectively preventing attacks on our network infrastructure."
"It does its job — it protects us from viruses. We don't really interact with it very much."
"I find the security heartbeat feature with synchronized security very useful. It's a very nice feature that allows you to basically switch off an endpoint. When an endpoint has got a virus or something like that, or it's infected or compromised, you can isolate it from the network, but only if you've got an XG Firewall as well. It also provides ease of use. It is the only antivirus that can recognize 25 out of the 36 ransomware and virus techniques that have been often used in terms of the behavior base using heuristics. It's beautiful, utterly amazing. No other antivirus can do that."
"The most valuable features of Intercept X are server lockdown, auto-remediation, and encryption monitoring."
"One reason why I have stuck with Sophos is because it grabs it and deals with it, and if it's known malware, it can quarantine it or delete it."
"The initial setup is simple."
"One of the best features of Sophos Intercept is that it repairs without slowing down the system."
"Malware protection and application blocking are absolutely great. The DLP and malware features are very helpful. It is also very user-friendly, reliable, and scalable. It is easy to set up. We are also happy with its price and support."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"The most valuable feature, in my opinion, is the dimension logging platform and the network traffic filtering."
"The interface is very good."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The solution is not stable."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"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."
"In my opinion, there have been significant developments in the product. In my opinion, I don’t have any suggestions as of now, however I can suggest a cost deduction which will be beneficial for all the parties. It will also relieve our budget and benefit our team."
"The performance offered by the product needs improvement."
"Technical support is too slow to schedule meetings."
"I would like to have a built-in firewall, rather than having to integrate one."
"It would be beneficial if you could expand support for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 without charging an additional fee."
"I am not very satisfied with the product's reporting overall, and it needs improvement in this area."
"They should keep doing what they're doing. Both of them have entered the EDR/MDR space, and they're keeping up with their competitors. I have a hard time understanding why their capabilities aren't garnering more attention."
"The main real-time scanning takes most of the processing power of my notebook."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"The interface is not the best."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Darktrace, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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.