We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response 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."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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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."
"Technical support is good."
"I like the real-time protection features. Windows Defender will detect if there's a threat like a Trojan or something like that but Kaspersky lets it run normally."
"For threat-hunting, I'll put some threats in a test scenario. I've downloaded known viruses that are out in the public for testing. They're not really a virus but they've got a signature. Defender for Endpoint will automatically find those, quarantine them for me, and alert me to what it did. It gives me "automated eyes.""
"The most valuable feature is its ability to effectively detect threats. It has the EDR feature, endpoint detection and response, and that is very good."
"We have just started to implement it. It is useful for protection from malware and ransomware."
"I like the simplicity of the portal and the integration with Microsoft Intune. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy to use and implement."
"In terms of the installation, ease of use, and user interface, Defender has been great so far."
"WithSecure includes an encrypted drive that stores a key for accessing the encrypted data."
"It offers good scalability."
"The only issue that we have today is with false positives. We have too many false positives with the solution."
"I use the solution to protect our infrastructure. The tool has special frames for banking. There is an additional secure filter for banking-related pages. It protects me from viruses, malware, and attacks."
"The product is stable."
"It is a scalable solution."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pros →
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"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 find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"I would like to be able to set up any kind of protection I want in the firewall, any IP address or any number."
"In India at least, it seems to be a bit more expensive than other options."
"Sometimes, there are different skews. In a basic skew, they should have basic log analysis without the need to integrate with any third-party or SIEM solutions, like Sentinel. This would make it so much easier for users who don't have log collection or log analysis."
"The solution could be more friendly for end-users, with different type of scans or scheduled scans for it."
"Reporting could be improved. I would like to see how many security incidents occurred in the last six months, how many devices were highly exposed to security risks, and how many devices were actually compromised."
"It is currently more suitable for end-users rather than enterprises with lots of other processes and third-party tools. It needs improvement on that front. We had many issues while integrating it with our enterprise solutions, such as Splunk, and third-party tools. It provides everything via APIs. Other vendors provide integration with third-party tools, but Microsoft doesn't do that. It is also logging too much and is not serialized from the process aspect. It has all the data, but it is not in a proper format or not properly indexed, which doesn't make it easier for enterprises to use this data. Other vendors provide troubleshooting information that can be used to troubleshoot issues, but Microsoft doesn't provide anything like that."
"Some integration components for Mac should be added. We use both Windows 10 desktops and Mac desktops, but presently, the Mac component is still lagging a bit behind."
"The file scanning has room for improvement. Many people use macros within their files, so there should be a mechanism that helps us to scan them for malicious payloads."
"The tool’s mobile version needs to be improved."
"The website rules are too complicated."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is scalable. My company has 800-1000 customers."
"The monthly reporting feature of WithSecure can be improved."
"Its automated functionality could be better."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Cons →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 32nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Includes an encrypted drive that stores a key for accessing the encrypted data, but the monthly reporting feature can be improved". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Vision One, Elastic Security and Cynet. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Detection and Response 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.