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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
40th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 0.9%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.3%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response0.9%
Other97.8%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Operations Manager at Philips
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.
Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research Development and Innovation at CSIR
Offers useful threat hunting and response capabilities but struggles to justify cost for smaller deployments
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR components; I also get involved with some of the XDR components, especially for the cloud. Regarding analysis features, such as deep behavioral detection, I do use it sometimes; I usually don't use the automated version of it, as I prefer threat hunting directly, depending on if the season is available. I know some of them have pretty good analytics engines, but I tend to do the threat hunting on my own. I manage incident response for a bunch of companies, so some of them have Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response integrated into Sentinel, some into Fortinet, and others into various tools. When considering cost-effectiveness, their pricing structure works such that if you're a large organization with more than a thousand endpoints to deploy to, then Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is worthwhile. But for anything less than 300, it's too expensive; obviously, the more you buy, the better the price, making it cheaper for you. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response best fits enterprise-level businesses such as huge corporations; however, we are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment. We're trying to see how we can improve it with some of our clients, but at the moment, it's struggling compared to other EDR solutions that we have deployed. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response a six.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the AI and mathematical components that they use."
"I've found the AI engine in CylancePROTECT to be particularly effective for technology and in preventing unknown threats."
"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"The deployment of updates is easy."
"You can manage all the threats and everything from a centralized dashboard."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"The CylancePROTECT agent is very low on CPU usage, so it has virtually no adverse impact on my servers, desktops, or workstations."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
 

Cons

"The solution should implement AI in the product."
"It should provide more details about the events that they have detected."
"I would like to see them fix the alerting system so that the endpoint reporting is a bit more streamlined."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use."
"I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice."
"While you are working, you are finding these things that were supposed to be waived have come back to being blocked. That's frustrating."
"Reporting is an area with shortcomings in CylancePROTECT that needs to be improved."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"CylancePROTECT is an affordable solution."
"We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years."
"My company is on a yearly CylancePROTECT subscription. Price-wise, the solution is slightly expensive, so I'd rate it as eight out of ten."
"Currently, we have competitive pricing for Cylance, which is affordable enough to consider."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"CylancePROTECT is worth the money, but I'm not sure of its exact price. I can't remember off the top of my head."
"The tool is not that expensive."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"The pricing is manageable."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Blackberry Protect?
It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immedi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
 

Also Known As

Blackberry Protect
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.