We performed a comparison between Fortinet Forticlient and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both solutions have a valuable set of features and are considered to have good pricing. Users seem to give Fortinet Forticlient slightly better ratings because its deployment is easier than that of Microsoft Defender For Endpoint.
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I think the solution is highly scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is dual authentication and the VPN is secure."
"Remote connectivity is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass, single point of management."
"It is very simple to use. I've used some of the others in the past, such as Cisco AnyConnect, which was a nightmare. I've used a couple of others, but FortiClient is very simple to use."
"The solution's TNA feature blocks devices from entering the network that do not meet compliance protocols."
"We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection."
"The solution is stable, we have not had any issues in the time we have been using it."
"The antivirus is the most valuable feature."
"Defender provides useful alerts and groups them. It sends an alert to your portal if it detects any malicious activity, and you can group multiple alerts to form an incident."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy to load and it runs quietly in the background, unlike other solutions."
"We are able to productively integrate with existing on-prem, hybrid, or cloud applications."
"This product is flexible, and it is very easy to get updates from the Microsoft website."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"It is a very advanced system based on AI. It has a very large database of places or sites on the internet where you should not go. It is continuously online."
"I like the fact that it has the ransomware solution in there. I'm glad that the ransomware solution is built into it. That's probably the biggest thing that I see in Microsoft Defender."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The solution is not stable."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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 haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"There is lagging in some of the authentication tools to support the newer versions, this is happening because they are not supported."
"The reports could be easier to set up."
"The memory check needs to be improved, giving better visibility into the run-time memory."
"I heard that Fortinet is going to enhance the firmware to have mobile versions. One is like Linux long-term support SCS and one with new features, but there is no support here. We spoke with the vendor multiple times, and they said that they will release these features soon."
"The solution's access control could be improved."
"I don't think FortiClient is bad, but it's very buggy. We ran into some issues with the EMS, which amounted to more than 10 cases last year."
"We've had some problems with having to remove the current version and either reinstalling an old version or updating to the new one."
"For buying or deploying it with additional features, apart from VPN client, web security, or antivirus, I would like to see the USB key blocking function included in this solution for endpoint security. For endpoint security, you need antivirus and all of the features included in antivirus software these days, web security, and USB key locking feature. If it is implemented in a way that in one package, you have all the primary features needed for security these days, it would be nice. All of those features will probably be additionally charged as it is a web security feature on FortiClient."
"They should bring back the feature of a dedicated proxy device for communication to the cloud. As of now, all the agents are required to send the logs directly to the cloud. There should be a solution where you can put a proxy and all the logs are consolidated, like a forwarder."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can use more advertising to promote their features."
"In India at least, it seems to be a bit more expensive than other options."
"Something that is unique to Microsoft is its licensing model. When you go out and you buy McAfee or Symantec, you know what you're getting out of the box, but with Microsoft, often, when you're looking to achieve a certain set of capabilities, those capabilities are spread across different products. You might try to do something you could do with CrowdStrike, but then find out that you also need to purchase Microsoft Defender for Identity or Microsoft Defender for Azure. You realize that when they talk about what they can offer within the Microsoft platform, it's really the suite of investments. So, sometimes, you may find yourself buying Defender for Endpoint thinking that it matches CrowdStrike, but then you find that Microsoft really needs to sell you something else. One plus one will equal three, but when you have a very concise platform, such as CrowdStrike, you know what you're going to get."
"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 product development team makes frequent changes that affect the stability of the solution."
"A challenge is that it is not a multi-tenant solution. Microsoft's tenant is a licensed tenant. I'm an MSSP. So, I have multiple customers. In Microsoft's world, that means that I can't just buy an E5 license and give that out to all my customers. That won't work because all of the customer data resides within a single tenant in Microsoft's world. Other products—such as SentinelOne, Palo Alto Cortex, CrowdStrike, et cetera—are multi-tenant. So, I can have it at the top of the pyramid for my analyst to look into it and see all the customers, but each customer's data is separate. If the customer wants to look at what we see, they would only see their data, whereas in the Microsoft world, if I've got multiple customers connected to the same Microsoft tenant, they would see everybody else's data, which is a privacy problem in Europe. It is not possible to share the data, and it is a breach of privacy."
"The anti-ransomware features need to be improved upon."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Ivanti Connect Secure and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.