We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 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."
"This is a feature-rich product."
"Has some great features not available elsewhere."
"The solution is scalable."
"The performance for Kaspersky is good, and it's not impacted our client performance."
"The most valuable features are the reports."
"Provides web and DNS protection over https."
"The detection engine running on endpoints works very well and provides a good protection level."
"The content filtering options are good."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"We have very good visibility on our endpoints. The level of information it throws back is helpful."
"You have endpoint security to keep your devices safe. That's the feature that we're interested in."
"It is a straightforward setup."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"Stable endpoint manager, antivirus, and antimalware, with fast technical support and a straightforward setup."
"The endpoint detection of threats is valuable. The initial detection of things like ransomware and viruses and being able to shut down machines immediately and stop a threat is valuable. We can stop a threat at a source versus allow it to propagate it across the network."
"We had Norton Antivirus before, and with Norton, we didn't have a way to centrally manage a lot of features. Defender allowed us to deploy it from our Office 365 admin console. That is probably the biggest thing that made us go with Defender."
"Microsoft's technical support is fantastic."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"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."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"It does not cover all of our security issues."
"The solution does not offer much support to its users in Spanish, so I would like to see them offer more support in Spanish."
"We'd like to see them improve the automatic response."
"Documentation needs to be simplified and improved so that it provides good product awareness for end users."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert needs to include a traffic interface."
"It consumes many system resources."
"Kaspersky needs to strengthen its standing in the market."
"I would like better integration with other products."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
"Defender could be more secure and stable."
"Threat intelligence has the potential for improvement, particularly by integrating more sources."
"The time it takes to restore the application could be improved. It has a lot of dependencies. It's not like the Microsoft security that comes with the OS. Updating through the command prompt, most of the time, it takes some time to download some of these dependencies."
"The automation could be simpler on the mitigation side. It has a learning curve. Otherwise, it's pretty easy."
"The integration and effectiveness of email security could be better. It's already built-in to the solution and checks emails, scans the links they contain etc."
"The interface could be improved."
"I would like to see online updates for patches for this solution. I would also like to see online information about what is trending in the market in terms of spams, viruses, or trojans. It takes some time to understand how this solution works. A few things are unclear at the beginning, such as whether it actually restricts the virus or spam at the initial stage, or when there is a security update, how will we come to know and how will it get synchronized. It would be really helpful if there is some kind of knowledge base in the form of video, audio, or document that can explain in a user-friendly way the setup, features, risks, and process to mitigate the risks. Currently, I have installed endpoint security for every individual system. I could not install it like other endpoint solutions where we have a server and a client. It would be really helpful if Microsoft Windows Defender has a server-client based model so that I can save some bandwidth when it downloads or uploads features. It will be helpful if we have a LAN-based or WAN-based controlling system."
"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."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 17th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Cynet, IBM Security QRadar, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
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.