We performed a comparison between Malwarebytes and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"This solution helps us by providing central management of anti-malware and anti-exploit functionality."
"The central management of devices from different sites is a very good feature; this has made them much easier to manage."
"It is intuitive and easy to use. For the most part, it does a good job of catching things. It is good at stopping stuff. I did a couple of tests with a password cracker. I tried to load that on, and Malwarebytes didn't let me do that, which was pretty good. It has a rollback feature that I haven't seen with any other company. If one of your endpoints are hit with mass ransomware, you could actually roll it back. I watched a demo of them do that, and it was pretty sweet."
"Being able to carry out a full scan on your system."
"It's very versatile and thorough."
"The most valuable features of Malwarebytes are the EDR and the complete feature set provided."
"The platform is straightforward to install."
"I like the solution's ability to detect potentially unwanted programs. For some reason, it seems superior to other solutions, or at least in comparison to McAfee."
"It is very light. It is the only solution that can be installed on a machine that already has an antivirus. It is a pretty complete solution."
"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."
"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."
"Its ease of installation is valuable. It has been a low-resource tool and the continuous updates in the past have made it attractive from the standpoint of the trust level on the protection."
"The most valuable features of the solution include the endpoint navigation protection, the protection related to the EMS service, as well as the control and the cloud integration capabilities."
"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."
"The solution is very simple and straightforward to use."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"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 SIEM could be improved."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"A solution must be installed in the main gateway to give an overview of the incoming and outgoing traffic. The technical support team's response time should be faster."
"Malwarebytes can improve its network database. Malwarebytes can scan the files and registry. It can scan the system with a light agent. It will not impact the performance of your PC. You can do the full scan and database scan using the EDR, and the RAM and CPU consumption will not increase."
"We have noticed that when the solution is doing the scanning, all the scanning activities make the device heavier. It slows down your machine."
"The product is a little bit more expensive than the other brands."
"I would like to see a little more detail in the log. So, when an event occurs, I'd like to know not just when it happened and on what device, but what activity was taking place on the machine at the time so that we can drill down. If we get a false positive, we have to do a lot of research and go back and forth with our end-users to know why it was a false positive. So, having a little more detail around detections and events would probably be my most asked feature."
"The interface could be improved. Currently, you need to really dig around to find the elements you need."
"They could come up with better reporting capabilities."
"Malwarebytes is too simplistic. From a SOC IR perspective, it doesn't give you very much data around it. It doesn't tie things or provide SHA-1 and SHA-256 detection information, which makes it hard to do an additional investigation."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
"There should be a Webroot Business Endpoint Protection mobile app."
"They should provide more information on the type of cyber attacks."
"The only complaint I have with Webroot is its inability to prevent UoD phishing and its inability to check against bots or block anti-attacks. Plus the URL server is in zero-definition."
"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."
"Unified threat management (UTM) integration."
"Reporting system could be improved."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Malwarebytes is ranked 28th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 33 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Malwarebytes is rated 8.0, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Malwarebytes writes "Intuitive, easy to use, and does a good job of catching and stopping things for the most part and has a unique rollback feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Malwarebytes is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, HP Wolf Security and Huntress, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, Intercept X Endpoint and CylancePROTECT. See our Malwarebytes vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
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.