We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's most valuable features are the lightweight agent which has absolutely zero performance issues. There is no performance deterioration on the laptop on the network. It is a signature-less antivirus and anti-malware solution, it doesn't depend on signatures which better protects the systems."
"As an EDR tool, we can integrate log management and event management. The solution deals with threats automatically, that's the advantage."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"As long as the machine is connected to the Internet, and CrowdStrike is running, then it will be on and we will have visibility; no VPNing in or making some type of network connection. CrowdStrike always there and running in the background; for us, that is big. We wanted something that could give us data as long as the machines connected to the Internet and be almost invisible to the employees."
"It's very easy to set up."
"I like the Overwatch feature the most."
"The scalability is good."
"The feature I like the most is the solution's detection."
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"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."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"CrowdStrike Falcon sometimes wrongly flags things as malicious. Let's say a user is active on Chrome only. Sometimes, our cross-segmenting will fetch from the backend data and show that it is malicious because of memory or CPU utilization."
"I think there's an opportunity to enhance the AI or at least the traps to say, if something changes from this baseline, let us know and flag it."
"The solution could improve by providing more types of reports because it's in the detection span you cannot re-export anything. If it could be exported to a CSV file directly there it would help a lot. I currently need to do this by API to get what I need."
"In a future release, I would like to see more integrations for data breaches and security features."
"They offered a white glove service that was extremely costly. When we got into it, we saw it was relatively easy. If I was being nitpicky, I'd say that I don't like being sold something that's unnecessary. That's the only downside I've seen to the solution."
"The management of the solution could improve."
"CrowdStrike needs to quit making up stuff about its features and functionality to bash its competition."
"There are some areas where some customers would prefer a different service."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 107 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 12th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 2 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas ThreatQ is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR.
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.
