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

Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Bitdefender GravityZone Ent...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
25th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Virtualization Security (3rd)
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
190
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (2nd), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is 0.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 11.5%, down from 15.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Mabry - PeerSpot reviewer
Gives a good snapshot of what's going on
The risk management tool does not have reporting, which I feel to be a huge mistake. While I can go into it and run the scan for the all the information, I must enter each thing individually to see what I need. I can't print or email a report to somebody in a different environment or to any of my clients for the purpose of advising how they must proceed. All I can do is go into and look at it. It would be nice to able to take the report and determine what must be focused on most critically, as opposed to merely being given a tremendous amount of information. This should be addressed. The solution should also do a better job of informing a person of what happened. The son of one of my clients, who has the solution installed in his house, was blocked from playing a certain game. While the solution only informed the person that it was blocked, it did not state what it had blocked. With another client who was in the middle of playing a game in his office, the solution blocked this but provided no telemetry whatsoever. I had to search in an attempt to see what was being blocked. Turning the solution off, however, enabled the game to work perfectly. It was blocking it for some reason, but I had no clue why it was doing so. The solution should be providing reports of everything, not just specific incidents. The solution has many features, but does not inform one of what was actually done, leaving a person in the dark when it comes to things that are not apparent. For specific threats, one need simply login to know what is transpiring. When there was a need to involve support, I would be instructed to download a certain software for gathering information. But, this is not how things should be. Support should be providing the information it possesses of what transpired.
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

"The product is a good standard security tool."
"The product offers an opportunity to monitor the things happening in our network. It also has a comprehensive dashboard."
"The most valuable features of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security are remote administration and deployment, comprehensive firewall protection, malware protection, and antivirus."
"Virus scan and the ability to remotely install are valuable features. Being able to manage everything in one place and set different policies and rules for different computer types are very useful features. It also has ransomware protection. It is very simple to use, and it is very effective."
"I like its unified interface, which also helps you scan Outlook email, for example. Multiple products can be standardized across endpoints or the EDR solution, and the integrations with SIEMs."
"We use patch management to keep our software up-to-date, significantly mitigating our risk of vulnerabilities. We're confident that Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security will either already know about new threats and have updated our machines, or they'll advise us quickly on mitigating them until an update is available."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security has a lot of telemetry that allows me to really see what's going on with the device."
"What I appreciate most about Bitdefender are its web content filtering, blocking malicious sites, and its ability to thwart brute force attacks on open ports."
"It can reach our applications and PC activities in the cloud."
"I find the vulnerability management section of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to be very useful for organizations."
"The features I have found most valuable are the ransomware and malware protection. The solution detects malware live and whenever it detects suspicious activity, it quarantines it."
"It doesn't cause the slowness of the system, which is one of the reasons why I like it."
"Provides good security features and you can view it in the central console."
"It does not make Windows slow, as compared to all of the third part antiviruses."
"Offers good protection."
"Real-time detection and cloud-based delivery of detections are highly efficient."
 

Cons

"The connection with the controller needs improvement. Some connections are currently unstable."
"The security features as per customers' requirements should be improved."
"I think it would be helpful if I could get a live console directly on the machine. Additionally, if I could run scripts on the machines to respond to any incidents, that would be a great feature."
"I like the Application Control feature, but it's a bit tricky. Managing it can be a bit cumbersome sometimes."
"Overall, Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is quite good. It always has new features which customers can use for free, so I can't say that something is missing in the solution, though one area for improvement is that the cloud version of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security still can't connect to a central SIEM. The on-premises version has that capability, but the cloud version doesn't."
"My main concern is that it's a bit heavy for some devices. Like Kaspersky or McAfee, it uses more RAM or memory. Similar to that, it causes issues for users and their own resources, similar to that. If you deploy on old legacy devices with only 1GB of RAM, then it could be a problem."
"The firewall capabilities could benefit from an upgrade since it lacks a high level of granularity and control."
"There is room for improvement in CPU utilization."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex."
"There could be an increase in security for the solution."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"It would be helpful if they included XDR features, on top of the EDR functionality."
"With regards to the interface, a challenge I found was that there was not enough documentation on how to tune it. I had to read multiple sources on the internet to learn how to configure the tool appropriately."
"One thing that was lacking in Defender was web filtering. Its web filtering wasn't as comprehensive. Sophos was a little bit better than Defender for blocking URLs or installing programs."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can use more advertising to promote their features."
"We encountered some issues when we were trying to enable automatic updates from our group policy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay for an annual license which is affordable."
"The general basic price is roughly $1.20 for a license with Bitdefender."
"The price is fair."
"The solution is reasonable and is nominally priced in accordance with the features that offer to the market."
"Its price has gone up since our last renewal. My renewal fee has gone from $517.99 in 2018 for 3 years to $739.99 when it renews this year in July. I love the product, but a price increase of over 40% is a bit exorbitant."
"Good in terms of pricing and flexibility."
"You don't have to pay extra after buying the product."
"The licensing costs can vary."
"It is free."
"The solution is free with Windows."
"You do not need to pay any additional costs for antivirus and anti-malware solutions for endpoint protection."
"The cost is competitive and reasonable because most of the expense is log analytics, storage, and data consumption and ingestion. These things can be throttled and controlled, so they are highly flexible. Defender has a lot of advantages over competing products."
"The price is higher than others because it is doing more than what the others are doing."
"Currently, for us, Windows Defender is free with the purchase of Windows Server. Pricing is an important point for us when we are looking at the competitors of this solution. If we choose to go with another vendor, we will have to pay some license fees."
"We have seen ROI. Most of the other competing alternatives will cost up to around $30 per user device. We average 400 devices. Therefore, the amount that we save each year is 400 times $30."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is cost-effective because there's one unified license, and with this unified license, you get the capabilities for your cloud applications, servers, and endpoints as well. Therefore, it saves us a lot of money because the cost with other solutions is for just one piece of OS or maybe an urban environment. The licensing process is not complex as well."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
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 do you like most about Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security?
It is perfectly stable. We haven't received any complaints from customers regarding stability or performance. It's been smooth sailing so far.
What needs improvement with Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security?
I think it would be helpful if I could get a live console directly on the machine. Additionally, if I could run scripts on the machines to respond to any incidents, that would be a great feature.
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 Security for Virtualized Environments, GravityZone Security for Virtualized Environments
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SambaSafety, Morefield Communications, Northstar Ltd., Citrix, Greenman-Pedersen
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.