Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response vs Field Effect MDR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Arctic Wolf Managed Detecti...
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
4th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (1st)
Field Effect MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Managed Detection and Response (MDR) category, the mindshare of Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response is 9.8%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Field Effect MDR is 3.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Kimberly Brock - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time threat detection has improved with comprehensive asset scanning
The threat intelligence feature is expected to be a significant advantage. However, a section for software inventory and real-time comparison with current CVEs would be beneficial. One can review an inventory of assets being scanned, including a software inventory along with CVE updates based on a company's software subscriptions, would be a game changer.
Simon Cutler - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to manage cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and improve our security team's efficiency and security posture
It would be incredibly valuable to have the Field Effect team handle some of the third-party application patching they're currently identifying. While it's fantastic that they're proactive in this area, the time commitment is significant. Integrating patching into their existing service offering would be a game-changer. I'd love to see a tool that aids sales discovery efforts when we engage new clients. Ideally, this internal tool would scan their network environment to identify potential risks and give us a comprehensive picture of their network infrastructure. This would be a huge asset in informing our sales strategies and showcasing our expertise.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Arctic Wolf is our eyes and ears 24/7 because we can't possibly watch all of our alerts. We may see all of these alerts, but our attention is distracted because we're working on other things."
"The visibility into our endpoints is huge."
"The solution works well for our team as it offers a hands-off approach, which we need."
"This service makes answering audits much easier since it covers so many security best practices."
"Arctic Wolf is laser-focused on providing top-notch customer service."
"The integration between Cisco AMPs and the Windows servers is most valuable. So, they can also sandbox machines on which they see something suspicious."
"We can effectively manage the massive amounts of security data that we receive from various sources such as firewalls, switches, endpoints, and other log sources."
"They provide useful quarterly updates."
"It provides valuable insights into our IT environment, enabling us to improve reselling, upgrades, and customer management."
"The most valuable features are Action Recommendations of Observations, which keep us informed about existing vulnerabilities so we can proactively update our endpoints and those of our customers against potential threats."
"The standout feature is its continuous 24/7 monitoring of all network traffic, providing unparalleled vigilance."
"The alerts that we get are valuable. It notifies us if there is any attempted access and if there are any areas where we need to create more security for clients. It is stopping anything from happening before there is even an issue."
"The automated response feature is incredibly effective."
"We are getting visibility over the network, not just for those hosts that have a Field Effect EDR agent but also things like the Internet of Things, guest networks, or rogue devices. We definitely have visibility into all network traffic, which is very cool."
"Unlike previous solutions, where we were solely informed of security incidents, Covalence's MDR allows for real-time incident prevention."
"I appreciate the "set it and forget it" nature of Field Effect Covalence."
 

Cons

"If you are not in the security field, this can be difficult to figure out from time to time."
"The implementation process could be a little more streamlined."
"It would be great if the whole process of determining vendor risk could be simplified by Arctic Wolf."
"They focus on detecting administrator-level control compromises. Because they're focusing more on administrator-level compromise, they are less able to see if an individual user has been compromised. It is, admittedly, very difficult because they don't know what normal human behavior is. If a hacker compromises a human account and then acts just like the human, how are you ever going to notice, unless you have some inside knowledge of how the company works? For example, they overlook account lockouts on user accounts, whereas in our own alerting system, we do not. We review every account lockout, and if it is bad, we contact the person, whereas they think of that as noise because they're more focused on the administrator-level compromise."
"I would like to see them build the ability to co-sell an EDR platform, manage an EDR or manage the actual response, potentially from the issues that are coming up from the security risks."
"I have heard that the tool doesn't go right to the endpoints."
"I can't think of any specific features that they need to add at the moment. As long as they continue to develop new solutions to support different operating systems and technologies, we are satisfied with their service. We appreciate the effort they put into adding new features and functionality to their service and believe they are doing a great job in providing us with all the necessary tools and resources to stay secure."
"They could probably expand on their integration tools. They can integrate with more security tools."
"One limitation is that if someone takes their laptop outside the office building, the DNS firewall provides minimal coverage, and we are unable to generate reports."
"It would be incredibly valuable to have the Field Effect team handle some of the third-party application patching they're currently identifying."
"In terms of improvement, there are instances where the ARO responses are slightly slower than preferred."
"In the AROs tab, if we encounter multiple duplicate recommendations, it would be helpful to be able to select and resolve or dismiss them all at once."
"I'd like improved visibility into the backend data where logs are stored, along with integrations with a wider range of products."
"It would be greatly beneficial to integrate compliance-related reporting directly into the portal."
"They put too much detail into the emails."
"The tagging of ARO closure has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I find their pricing to be reasonable and competitive."
"The pricing is pretty competitive."
"It is more expensive than CrowdStrike, but it also has more features. I don't remember the amount, but I do remember that it was on the higher side. I believe we have five sensors, and the sensors have a yearly cost. We don't have any additional costs, but I know that if we have more features, they will add to the cost."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"The pricing is fair."
"We were particularly impressed with their pricing model, which charges per user rather than per system."
"The pricing isn't sized, so Field Effect doesn't make it easy for anything under 25 users. I'm not crazy about that."
"It is on the high end, but it is worth it for the service that you get from them."
"The shift to a per-user pricing model and the introduction of a base price for the on-premises or virtual appliance has been particularly advantageous."
"The licensing model itself is solid, but we're ironing out some inconsistencies in how customer profiles are configured."
"Although Covalence is expensive, it provides good value for the price."
"While Field Effect Covalence's pricing seems competitive for the market, the biggest hurdle lies in the lack of dedicated security budgets within many organizations."
"Covalence is cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
54%
Non Profit
4%
Government
4%
Retailer
3%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response?
The agents give pretty good visibility into what is happening at the endpoint.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response?
The pricing is okay and comparable to other solutions, with competitive pricing obtained for most options. We value the ease of use and hands-off approach.
What needs improvement with Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response?
The only frustrating aspect is the lack of support for Windows on ARM devices. We cannot fully secure these devices until they release an updated version of their agent software.
What do you like most about Field Effect Covalence?
It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Field Effect Covalence?
In our evaluation, two years ago, we found the Field Effect Covalence product and service to be the simplest to set up and pricing was lower than the other competitors.
What needs improvement with Field Effect Covalence?
The solution could improved DNS filtering and fuller integration into ConnectWise PSA (I understand both are in the works). The current roaming DNS filter doesn't seem to be too complete and we're ...
 

Also Known As

Arctic Wolf AWN CyberSOC
Field Effect Covalence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agero, Madison Memorial Hospital, DLZ, Howard LLP, City of Sparks
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response vs. Field Effect MDR and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.