We compared Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration and Mimecast Email Security across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Features: Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration offers exceptional integration through APIs, advanced protection against data leaks, and the ability to detect complex social engineering attacks. Mimecast Email Security is appreciated for its efficient archiving capabilities and effective protection against targeted threats. Its seamless integration with Microsoft 365 also earned high marks.
Room for Improvement: Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration could improve integration with Exchange and other SaaS clouds while enhancing its threat clouds and AI engines. Mimecast Email Security should focus on improving its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and ease of setup.
Service and Support: Check Point has earned mixed reviews for its customer service. Some customers appreciate the technical support provided, while others are dissatisfied with response times. Mimecast's customer service elicits varied opinions, with some customers expressing satisfaction with its responsiveness and effectiveness, while others perceive it as unsatisfactory.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point Harmony Email is considered relatively easy to implement. Users had mixed experiences with Mimecast Email Security's setup. Some users found it fast and uncomplicated, while others found it moderately complex.
Pricing: Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration is a cost-effective option. It offers competitive prices and is suitable for small to medium-sized organizations. Mimecast Email Security is generally seen as costly, and some users struggle to justify the expense. It’s perceived as more expensive than competing solutions.
ROI: Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration delivers superior return on investment compared to other options. It is challenging to measure the return on investment for Mimecast Email Security.
Comparison Results: Check Point Harmony Email and Collaboration is an effective solution for blocking malicious attachments and detecting social engineering attacks. However, there is room for improvement in terms of integration and support, reducing false positives, and enhancing response times. Mimecast is commended for its archiving and targeted threat protection capabilities. On the other hand, Mimecast faces challenges with its administrative aspect, filtering capabilities, and high pricing.
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365's most valuable features are safe attachments and safe links."
"The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"The product is not resource-intensive."
"Defender is a SaaS platform, so it offers more flexibility. Managing the permissions is easier. The solution's automated detection and response features are scalable."
"The benefit that stands out to me is the ability for multiple individuals to collaborate simultaneously within the same document. Additionally, there is the option to save the document directly in the integrated OneDrive or SharePoint."
"Since we have started using the solution, there have been fewer compromises."
"The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"The solution is very easy to use. All you have to do is to assign the license to the end-user and it's done. The customer will only have the feature activated, and the solution will monitor the emails to determine if they are a threat or not."
"The program has a nice interface and it is easy to use."
"Data loss and data leakage prevention are well deployed which helps businesses to scale and expand effortlessly without any trouble."
"As with most of the other Check Point products, the CloudGuard SaaS has the advanced visibility of the events and alerts."
"This product enhances faster and more secure sharing of information among colleagues from different departments."
"The most valuable features would be its ability to intercept phishing emails and emails laden with malware, viruses, false links, etc."
"The feature I find to be most valuable is very much the zero-touch provisioning. I was able to be up, operational, and 100 percent functional in less than a half an hour."
"Its analysis or emulation in the review of each file using the cloud and Check Point helps make each interaction via email more secure."
"Based on domain and URL reputation, it will allow traffic to flow."
"Mimecast certainly helped my customers reduce phishing emails."
"We like Mimecast's spam filtering. The email signature feature is also a big plus for our users."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"The product's most valuable features are impersonation protection and phishing countermeasures."
"URL inspection works pretty well."
"The product is good. To date, we have not faced any challenges."
"The solution offers good technical support."
"The setup was easy."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"About eight months ago, we started to measure the quantity of phishing and spam that we have been receiving, and it has been increasing a lot. That means that protection for our email is not as good as we were expecting."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 must improve the overall management style, including the GUI. It also needs to change the filters so that it is easy to whitelist and blacklist data."
"They have moved features from one console to another. Things have been moved around in the interface and it takes me time to find where certain features are."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"We are always looking for others tools to increase automation on tasks. There can be better integration with other solutions, such as PowerPoint and email."
"Microsoft sometimes has downtime, and we'll get several incidents coming in back to back. We have a huge backlog of notifications, many of which may be false positives. However, there might be serious alerts, so we can't risk dismissing all of them at once."
"I need to go to Check Point's admin portal if I want to see the license list and the details of the users of the tool, making it an area of concern where some ease of process should be provided from an improvement perspective."
"We understand that false positives are always there, but sometimes the notifications are more than expected."
"They must provide security to more email service providers."
"Since the portal to the management and administration entry sometimes has performance problems and takes a long time to respond to what has arrived, the handling of the tool is difficult."
"Other vendor support teams go after fixing the issue the moment that they join the remote session. The problem that I have faced with Check Point support is that they share the case number with me, then it takes at least two days for them to join a remote session with us, even though we have asked for this timeframe to change. Even though we have already explained the problems that we are facing or the business pain points in our network on the call or email, we have to repeat the problem statements again in the console. It can take four or five days to resolve the issue from the moment they understand the problem. This includes the time to teach their R&D or internal team whatever the issue is. I have faced timeframes as long as seven to 10 days for fixing some issues."
"The solution fails to support hybrid deployments."
"I would like Check Point to extend its coverage to include more cloud applications."
"From time to time, the system's administrators notice the increase in the false-positive alerts being reported by CloudGuard SaaS."
"While it's quick and easy, the initial setup could be more user-friendly."
"External security features need improvement."
"I'd like to have better support from the product in the future."
"Its pricing can be improved. It is a bit expensive."
"The reaction time between a new threat being identified and Mimecast picking it up needs to be narrowed a bit."
"The platform's cost-effectiveness could be improved."
"Lately, Mimecast's outbound mail servers have been regularly blocklisted by spam filters. That didn't happen a few years back, but it seems to be a more frequent problem these days. When a server is blocklisted, it means all of my outgoing mail ends up in the recipient's junk mail. That affects my reputation and business confidence."
"I did have a problem with Mimecast. That is why I was looking for an alternative solution because their sender IP address gets poorly rated by Microsoft."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is ranked 7th in Email Security with 49 reviews while Mimecast Email Security is ranked 5th in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 25 reviews. Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is rated 8.6, while Mimecast Email Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration writes "Has a user-friendly dashboard, a great anti-phishing algorithm, and sandboxing for testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mimecast Email Security writes "It gives clients peace of mind and helps them educate their users about threats". Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration is most compared with Avanan, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Cisco Secure Email, Barracuda Email Protection and Fortinet FortiMail Cloud, whereas Mimecast Email Security is most compared with Abnormal Security, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Cisco Secure Email, Darktrace and Fortinet FortiMail. See our Check Point Harmony Email & Collaboration vs. Mimecast Email Security report.
We monitor all Email Security 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.