We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is the industry leader for Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions. It is very well integrated and can handle almost anything. Users can control everything through a very intuitive central console. The solution works continuously and uses next-generation AI to keep every endpoint safe at all times. Symantec users say it can be a bit buggy and is complex to learn, making it less desirable.
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The primary advantage is that you don't need to install it. It's included in the Windows 10 delivery."
"The scalability is good."
"The attack surface reduction rules are the most valuable. We're able to have unattended remediation actions when the solution works side by side with a local antivirus like Microsoft Defender or Kaspersky. The attack surface reduction rules help us to proactively block and stop threats."
"Microsoft's technical support is fantastic."
"It is easy to use because it is already pre-installed in Windows 10. We don't have to do anything to configure it. You can also configure the firewall by using a group policy so that it can be easily adopted in an environment."
"The EDR feature is most valuable."
"In terms of the installation, ease of use, and user interface, Defender has been great so far."
"The antivirus features are very useful."
"Some important features that are included are the built-in firewall and device control."
"Great security and very user friendly."
"The most valuable feature for our organization is the antivirus, as our staff is the target of zero-day malware and viruses."
"The solution can be scaled to handle different threats."
"The application and device control are valuable features, and the live update is another one. We have a schedule to check every four hours for the live update."
"All Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) features, such as anti-malware, zero-day attack protection, and IPS features, are valuable."
"With a single console, you get control over Mac, Windows, iOS, and Android. This control is most valuable."
"The administrator's console is very good and easy to manage with it. Deploying patches, definition updates and report is simple."
"Detections could be improved."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Microsoft Defender could be improved with features more like the McAfee ePO. It would be better if I had a console to get all the information for my endpoints. Maybe this is too much for it, but it would be better if it could handle those non-signature-based malicious codes or viruses."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by making the reporting faster. It takes some time to reflect back to the administration portal of what has been updated. For example, out of 100 Computers, approximately 90 computers received updates, but when you check the administration portal over one or two days, you will only see 75, even though 90 were updated."
"The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security."
"In India at least, it seems to be a bit more expensive than other options."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by making the reporting better."
"The GUI is very complex and could be more user friendly."
"Additional security would be beneficial."
"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."
"The solution has become quite complicated since Broadcom acquired Symantec, and we no longer sell it or try not to sell it."
"Reporting in this solution needs improvement."
"There are a few negative points. They should separate the feature for each separate solution for mobile devices. The second one is about the price, it's expensive. Finally, the third would be the complexity of implementation."
"The solution could improve by adding encryption. If it had encryption along with antivirus it would be better."
"We had an issue with the Broadcom migration. We had some problems with product support, and the deployment is tricky because it's an on-premises technology. Deploying any on-premises security solution is hard because you have to distribute the software."
"Symantec End-point production doesn't support the EDR function."
"It can be improved in terms of features and integration. It should have more advanced features and more integration. Currently, it is just talking to their own solutions. They could add more artificial intelligence, more XDR, and more integration with other vendors so that we can do sharing of information with other vendors."
"If you're not charged with administering the product and you don't do it every day it can sometimes be difficult to remember how to do the simple basic things, so some type of help or guidance for your most regular or frequent tasks would be good."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 78 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 25 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "You can access all your security data and telemetry from a single pane of glass". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Malwarebytes, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Symantec 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.