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

Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 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

Check Point Harmony Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (9th)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Check Point Harmony Endpoint is 2.5%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Alejandro Flores. - PeerSpot reviewer
Good visibility with cloud centralized management and several layers of security
There are some "weak points" that have to be mentioned, including: 1) If the IT department is used to "cloning" endpoints (making images) you are going to have a hard time trying to install the product and you are going to end up reading a lot of Check Point documents. 2) If you are used to the granularity of roles features in Check Point Quantums products you are going to be a little bit disappointed. You can't set customized roles with customized read/write permissions. 3) You need a mature security team to manage this solution in order to get the most value from it.
Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the most valuable features is the Threat Emulation and Threat Extraction. These features are able to scan email attachments before the user is able to access the file and then provide a safe copy of the attachment. Malicious files never get to the users machine. This is a very valuable feature of this solution."
"We were under an attack in our environment, and the Check Point response was good because we didn't lose anything."
"Compared to its competitors, Check Point Harmony Endpoint has advantages in areas like EDR and behavioral detection."
"We love that we don't have to upgrade it anymore. They take care of that."
"Check Point Endpoint Security helps us ensure device control and security. It helps us make sure users can access only the network resources they should be accessing and keep malware to a minimum."
"Check Point Harmony Endpoint can be easily deployed and is cost effective and more secure."
"It provides encryption for operating systems and protects browsers against malware."
"The solution has good threat intelligence features."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"The most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"The support is very good. They reply and respond very quickly."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
 

Cons

"The heartbeat interval must be improved."
"There are still functionalities that I have not been able to fully test and I would like to spend more time using the tool before offering an opinion to the IT Central community on this point."
"The solutions agent could have better performance, it is a little slow sometimes."
"The Infinity Portal login is "iffy" at times."
"Some of the less tech-savvy users sometimes find it difficult in adjusting and learning how to use the platform."
"An additional feature I would like to see involves the VPN."
"We did have some early compatibility issues, which I hope Check Point has since resolved."
"If you're using an endpoint that does not have sufficient resources, it would be very tough to use."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay on an annual basis. There are no additional fees, they mostly tell us what we have to pay. We have budgeted for it."
"The licensing cost for Check Point is $3 USD or $4 USD per end-user."
"I rate Check Point Harmony Endpoint's pricing a seven out of ten because it is a little high."
"The solution is reasonable, but there are cheaper solutions out there."
"In comparison to other software solutions available on the market, it comes at a higher price point."
"We pay roughly 80,000 Swedish krona per year. When it comes to the firewall, it's roughly 150,000 Swedish krona yearly. There's also maintenance, of course, which is roughly 10,000 krona per month."
"The cost is huge compared to other products that are available on market."
"Initial monies replacing all AVs with a single product is about £10k."
"One thing about their licensing program that I like is that just one covers the server as well as on the endpoint as well as mobile devices. There is no complexity in calculating how many SKUs I need for mobile, for laptop, for desktop, and for servers. It's very simple and that makes it much easier to budget."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Check Point Harmony Endpoint?
The platform's most valuable features are the ability to build API, which meets our business requirements, and the VPN client, which provides VPN access from a single client.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point Harmony Endpoint?
The price for Check Point Harmony Endpoint ( /products/check-point-harmony-endpoint-reviews ) is good considering the services it offers. It is not expensive and provides comprehensive coverage.
What needs improvement with Check Point Harmony Endpoint?
One area that requires improvement is the amount of audit logs the system can save, as it is currently limited to fourteen days.
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Also Known As

Check Point Endpoint Security, Endpoint Security, Check Point SandBlast Agent
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Boston Properties, Independence Care System, Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre (MCEC), Courtagen Life Sciences, Carmel Partners
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.