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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (13th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
Webroot Business Endpoint P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is 0.7%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mark Broughton - PeerSpot reviewer
Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information
We were using a third-party help desk. One of the ways that they were fixing problems was to delete the client and then add the client back if there was an issue where the client had stopped communicating. Any improvement in the client communicating back to the server would be good, particularly for machines that are offline for a couple of weeks. A lot of our guys were working on a rotation where the machine might be offline for that long. They were also terrible about rebooting their machines, so those network connections didn't necessarily get refreshed. So, anything that could improve that communication would be good. Also, an easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful. If you could say, "Okay, we've got these two machines. This one says it's not reporting and this one says it's been reporting. Obviously, somebody did a reinstall," it would help. That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number. Not that Cisco was going to come down on you and say, "Oh, you're using too many licenses," right away. But to have a much more accurate license usage count by being able to better dedupe the records would be good. I also sent over a couple of other ideas to our technical rep. A lot of that had to do with the reporting options. It would be really nice to be able to do a lot more in the reporting. You can't really drill down into the reports that are there. The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint. Also, there was one section when I was playing with the automation where it was asking for the endpoint type rather than the machine name. If I could have just put in the machine name, that would have been great. So there are some opportunities, when it comes to searching, to have more options. If I wanted to search, for example, by a Mac address because, for some reason, I thought there was a duplication and I didn't have the machine name, how could I pull it up with the Mac address? When you're getting to that level, you're really starting to get into the ticky tacky. I would definitely put the reporting and documentation way ahead of that.
Rick Cassel - PeerSpot reviewer
Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting
We've had a couple of events both this year and last year where it just didn't seem to catch ransomware, which is impossible to do if someone has hands-on with the system. There were some things that they had or used to have or don't have that I still haven't figured out called journaling. And it was supposed to be a way to roll back changes that were made. However, they're telling me they don't have that. That's not in the system. It’s my understanding that it doesn’t actually scan any files at all. They just look at their database of files they've scanned previously, and either it matches or doesn't. That might be where the shortcoming is, is that it just can't stay up-to-date fast enough to stop new things that are coming in. It's an after-the-fact anti-virus. It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it. There is one thing that is deplorable with the product that I would change as soon as I found a better one. However, the reports are worthless. You go and look at a scan report and cannot get a log of machines. I can log into a console and see the files were scanned every day at 2:00 AM, and they all passed green or something was detected and removed. However, you have to go to the console. I don't have anything that I can send to my client on reports. What they give you is a bunch of bar graphs with no details. You can't drill down. It'll say two infections. However, it doesn't tell you what machines. You've just really got several different reports, and they're all just a bunch of graphs and wasted paper. There's nothing really substantial. The reports that I can use for client-facing, once a month, to say, "Here, we scanned all these workstations. Here are our results," don’t exist. They've got fake reports. I've screamed about that for years, and they just won't do anything. Therefore, I created my own little up-to-date or not ask fail-type report. I send that to them in place of a report directly from a product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The solution’s most valuable feature is malware protection."
"Cisco has definitely improved our organization a lot. In terms of business, our company feels safer. We actually switched from legacy signature-based solutions to threat intelligence-based and machine learning-based solutions, which is Cisco Secure. This has improved our security significantly, from 10% of signature-based technology security to 99.9% of the current one which we are running. We were happy."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"There aren't any features that really stand out — I just want it to keep malware out of my system. To date, I haven't had any malware in my system."
"It monitors traffic and keeps us from getting ransomware or other viruses."
"It is very lightweight on the workstations, not slowing them down while still doing its job very well."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"The ease of use of the centralized admin console is its best asset."
"The traffic security monitoring, traffic application access feature called the agent, the main feature which is the endpoint security feature are the ones I found valuable. And it also had the in branch security in kind of SD WAN, good three hundred and sixty protection. It is specific and there is ease of deployment also present."
"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."
 

Cons

"The technical support is very slow."
"Cisco Meraki could benefit from AI assistance or intelligent assistance features. Compared to competitors like Juniper, Cisco Meraki currently lacks a digital network assistant, which is an area Cisco is reportedly working on."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"One of the things that Cisco Secure Endpoint really needs is that it's not just Secure Endpoint, it's a point product, and I think we really need to move into solution-based selling, designing, and architecting. So that we're not worried about putting things on endpoints and selling 'x' amount of endpoints, but to provide a solution that covers all of the remote access and sell them as solutions that cover multiple things."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"Its price is okay for us, but it can always be better. There's always room for improvement when it comes to pricing."
"An updated UI would be nice, but is not hardly used."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"It would be great if there was a feature which would allow you to scan an individual file on an endpoint user's computer."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"Unified threat management (UTM) integration."
"Their customer support should be better. We started having some issues with it, and we didn't get the required support."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"The price is very good."
"It is quite cost-effective. I would rate it ten out of ten."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"The solution's price is about the same as that of Palo Alto solutions."
"It is an expensive solution."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."
"If you purchase for clients, then you are the managing billing entity. It's better to either get a monthly subscription check from your clients, or to prepay for the year (so as to not keep cash in reserve to pay the bill each month) IMHO."
"From a pricing standpoint, I would rate it a four out of five."
"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."
"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."
"We evaluate other options using multiple choices, best value, management and functionality."
"Our strategy was to overestimate the complexity and cost. It turned out that Webroot's assurance was justified."
"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Real Estate/Law Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
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 Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
I am not entirely sure about the exact licensing cost. It ranges from 2,000 to 2,500 INR annually.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Previously, there were options to uninstall the agent without a password if you had admin access, and this could be improved. It may require a password for uninstalling clients, which would be help...
What do you like most about Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.
What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Mytech Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.