We performed a comparison between Morphisec 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."It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"The simplicity of the solution, how easy it is to deploy and how small it is when deployed as an agent on a device, is probably the biggest aspect, given what it can do."
"It provides full visibility into security events and from both solutions in one dashboard. I'm not a big security guy, if I have a threat that looks like there's a problem, I will ask Morphisec to dissect it for me, and tell me what might be happening. Because it tends to be all hash codes, so I can tell what's going on. They've been pretty good with that."
"All the alerts are on the dashboard, which is quite simple and useful for us. You can easily check all the alerts that are being blocked or allowed, or whatever the action is. You can easily see that and you can take the necessary actions. You can add a PowerShell extension or any activities for blocking at your network level or for endpoints."
"Morphisec stops attacks without needing to know what type of threat it is, just that it is foreign. It is based on injections, so it would know when a software launches. If a software launches and something else also launches, then it would count that as anomalous and block it. Because the software looks at the code, and if it executes something else that is not related, then Morphisec would block it. That is how it works."
"Morphisec also provides full visibility into security events for Microsoft Defender and Morphisec in one dashboard... in the single pane of glass provided by Morphisec, it's all right there at your fingertips: easy to access and easy to understand. And if you choose to go down further to know everything from the process to the hash behind it, you can."
"We have seen it successfully block attacks that a traditional antivirus did not pick up."
"Since using Morphisec we have seen a downturn in attacks because Morphisec protects us versus Defenders and whatnot that are signature-based. I know we have not had any issues with ransomware or other zero-day attacks that we've seen with machines that, all of a sudden, have become before we instituted the product. Now the machine had to be re-imaged and there was a loss of data because something was on the machine. You couldn't really determine what was on the machine because nothing was picking it up. The products we were using weren't picking it up."
"Morphisec makes use of deterministic attack prevention that doesn’t require investigation of security alerts. It changes the memory locations of where certain applications run. If you think of Excel, opening a PDF, running an Excel macro, or opening a webpage and clicking on a link, all of those actions run in a certain area of memory. Morphisec changes the memory locations of where those run."
"Doesn't consume resources or affect the computer performance at all."
"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"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."
"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."
"It is very lightweight on the workstations, not slowing them down while still doing its job very well."
"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."
"There aren't any features that really stand out — I just want it to keep malware out of my system. To date, I haven't had any malware in my system."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"We have only had four attacks in the last year, "attacks" being some benign PDF from a vendor that, for some reason, were triggered. There were no actual attacks. They were just four false positives, or something lowly like adware. There have been false positives with both the on-premises solution and the cloud solution."
"If anything, tech support might be their weakest link. The process of getting someone involved sometimes takes a little time. It seems to me that they should have all the data they need to let me know whether an alert is legitimate or not, but they tend to need a lot of information from me to get to the bottom of something. It usually takes a little longer than I would expect."
"From a company standpoint, a little more interaction with the customers throughout the year might be beneficial. I would like check-ins from the Morphisec account executives about any type of Morphisec news as well as a bit more interaction with customers throughout the year to know if anything new is coming out with Morphisec, e.g., what they are working on in regards to their development roadmap. We tend not to get that up until the time that we go for a yearly renewal. So, we end up talking to people from Morphisec once a year, but it is usually at renewal time."
"Morphisec is a venture startup. They are still early in their growth stage. They need to get mature on their customer support and on how they interface with system tools. For example, they need to get multifactor in place and an API for the major multi-factor systems, e.g., Okta, Duo, Ping, and Microsoft. They don't have them built in yet. They are working on them. It is just not there yet. Also, their stability, customer support, and processes need improvement, which is just part of maturity."
"The only area that really needs improvement is the reporting functionality. Gathering the detailed information that is in the system for an executive, or for me as a director, could be better. Some of the interface and reporting aspects are a little bit dated. They're working on it."
"We sometimes have to depend on the support team to know what action we should take. If the solution for an alert can be built into the report that we are getting, it will save time, and the interaction with support would be less. At times, corrective action is required, but at times, we don't need to take any action. It would be good if we get to know in the report that a particular infection doesn't require any action. It will save us time and effort."
"I haven't been able to get the cloud deployment to work. When there's an update, I'm supposed to be able to roll it out for the cloud solution, but right now I'm continuing to use our SCCM solution to update it."
"Right now, it's just their auto-update feature. I know they are currently working on that. When they release a new version of the threat prevention platform, I do have to update that, rolling out to every computer. They have said, "From version 5, you would be able to do an auto-update." While this is very minor, that is the only thing that I would say needs to be upgraded. It would just make life a lot easier for other IT teams. However, I have simplified the process, so all I need to do is just download one file."
"Their customer support should be better. We started having some issues with it, and we didn't get the required support."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"I did notice that my OS slowed down, but I don't know if that's due to Webroot."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"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."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to focus on how they can widen their area of scope by not just being an antivirus tool anymore. The shortcoming in the customization area of the tool needs improvement."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Morphisec is ranked 41st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 21 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Morphisec is rated 9.2, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Morphisec writes "Light on the endpoint and does not have any performance hindrance on the endpoint". 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". Morphisec is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Code42 Incydr, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, Intercept X Endpoint and Cynet. See our Morphisec 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.
