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

Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Bitdefender GravityZone EDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
190
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is 3.1%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 12.5%, down from 17.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Mabry - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides telemetry, risk assessment, and behavior monitoring
I like the risk assessment tool built into Bitdefender GravityZone EDR because I'm really into risk assessments and vulnerability testing. I think that is crucial and needed, and I don't see that often with most EDRs. The telemetry I get from the tool can be used in a SOC I use. The solution has behavior monitoring that allows you to monitor people's specific behaviour and practices. You can then ask the person to stop or start doing something. You can also do application management and access management. You can do many things within Bitdefender GravityZone EDR because it is like a one-stop shop scenario.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to update with good protection and a useful cloud portal
We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. The malware protection is good. The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively. We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it. It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well. The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning. Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there. While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%. While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"GravityZone can be controlled from the cloud."
"The advantage of the solution is that it has a console on the cloud and you can update the clients."
"You can analyze any incident or malicious behavior. You can take action from within the EDR, and it can assist you in understanding how the attack was initiated or any malicious behavior in your environment."
"It was easy to set up."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra has many features, such as VPN, web filtering, and email filtering. The product has many good reviews, and I like how straightforward it is to implement. It's also easy to access and use."
"Useful for the day-to-day analysis of the security infrastructure."
"The performance is great."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Defender for Endpoint has significantly improved our security posture."
"The visibility into threats that the solution provides is pretty awesome... This is something that makes me think, "Wow, okay. If I had my own organization, I would probably get this too." It stops the threat before an employee gets phished or something gets downloaded to their computer."
"We have very good visibility on our endpoints. The level of information it throws back is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use the solution right out of the box without too much configuration."
"It's an enterprise solution that provides a centralized console and it supports all the platforms that we use, including Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, and Android."
"We had certain compliance and usage issues. For example, our company wanted to go with CIS, but we didn't have a proper way of measuring whether the endpoints have the right standards in place or whether they were compliant with CIS. Microsoft Defender was like a one-stop for most things because it gave us the vulnerability and patching scores so that our vulnerability management teams can focus on covering up the vulnerabilities and the patching team can check the vulnerable versions and deploy the right versions."
"It shows us the risky sign-ins, and if a user's password has been compromised."
"Offers good protection."
 

Cons

"Bitfender could improve their modules on the server. For example, Bitdefender doesn't have content filters or firewall modules on the server. It would be great if it had a networking module and a content filter module at the workstations."
"Application Control should be available on the cloud."
"We would like to see password management integrated into the solution because I don't like having a third-party password management system."
"The software itself is solid. It would be better if it was more of a real-time solution, like SentinelOne. The one thing that holds me back on the SentinelOne side is that I can blacklist websites and stuff like that, but it's not as granular as Bitdefender. With Bitdefender, I feel like I have more control over what I can whitelist and blacklist."
"We would like to see a more advanced dashboard."
"The product fails to provide guides to its users...I want the tool to offer some guides and hands-on training that can guide users who want to learn more about the product without the vendor's help."
"They were working on the encryption management for laptops, and if they complete it then it would be helpful."
"Sometimes, the platform takes a while to allow connectivity on the Mac endpoints."
"I would like to have additional features such as DNS lookup, which would help for detecting malicious sites."
"Lowering the price would be an improvement."
"The time to generate certain alerts on our dashboard can take between 45 minutes to an hour, and I am unsure of the factors that influence this duration."
"There is no behavior analytics for devices and endpoints. There is no behavior-based protection."
"I am not sure if I will be using this product in the future because of the price."
"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."
"I have accounts for administrators and corporate employees, but I also have accounts for students. I can't split these types of accounts. I need a separate configuration for both... I need to research how I can get alerts for only the administrative machines."
"I would like to be able to set up any kind of protection I want in the firewall, any IP address or any number."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is cost-effective and has the best pricing."
"Price-wise, we have a better licensing agreement with Bitdefender than we did with competing vendors."
"There is a fully functional trial that we used and we didn't have any issues."
"The solution is not expensive but there are cheaper options in the market. In terms of competitiveness, the price is reasonable with no other additional costs besides the licensing fees."
"There are some differences. It's more cost-effective, yet it provides the same functionalities as Defender. That's why I've been exploring the comparisons. We pay for it annually, and it's a per-seat payment."
"There are different packages available that vary in terms of licensing fees."
"If you look at the solution's price point, it's actually low market value, especially in comparison to other ones."
"When I first started using this solution I was paying $80 annually. I did not pay any additional fees. There are other solutions that are cheaper on the market."
"The price of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is reasonable. Other solutions are more expensive, such as ClowdStrike."
"Licensing options vary. Some customers buy it as an enterprise agreement and pay yearly. Others buy it as a CSP, so they pay per month. It completely depends on the customer's needs."
"You don't need to worry about the renewal and purchase of antivirus products. It is bundled with Windows 10, so you don't need to worry about separately purchasing any antiviruses."
"Given our extensive Microsoft licensing, transitioning to Defender for Endpoint did not affect licensing costs."
"The price was a problem for me three years ago, but they improved their E3, E5, and a la carte licensing. In other words, you have to get all of E5. That used to be a problem because you had E3, Defender, and guardrails, but you needed an E5 license to get the management suite and the analytics. It's more flexible now. You can switch from a la carte to the entire suite when it starts to make sense. It's becoming more economically competitive to go that route."
"Because Microsoft Defender comes as an add-on, it can be a bit expensive if you're trying to buying it separately. Another option is to upgrade, but the enterprise licenses for Microsoft can also be quite a bit pricey. Overall, the cost of Microsoft Defender compared to that of other endpoint detection solutions is slightly higher."
"If you don't purchase the advanced threat protection then there is no additional charge."
"We have been using the free version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Educational Organization
27%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra?
They need to improve the dashboard by adding a dedicated executive view. This view should provide executives with a clear overview of what's happening. Also, the UI needs to be more user-friendly, ...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?
We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior solution. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security s...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
 

Also Known As

Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra, Bitdefender GravityZone
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Mentor Graphics, Rudersdal Kommune
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.