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) (12th), Cisco Security Portfolio (6th)
Webroot Business Endpoint P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
42nd
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 March 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

"The best feature that we found most valuable, is actually the security product for the endpoint, formerly known as AMP. It has behavioral analytics, so you can be more proactive toward zero-day threats. I found that quite good."
"The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. So, that's the most important feature for me."
"It used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"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."
"The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this product is that there is a lot more malware slipping through my email filters than I expected."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."
"Speed"
"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."
"Low performance requirements."
"I rate the initial setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"The main reason we had Webroot is that it was cost-effective for our clients."
 

Cons

"Previously, there were options to uninstall the agent without a password if you had admin access, and this could be improved."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"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... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"It is not very stable because we have new versions four times a year, which fixes bugs. We had some problems with some deployments."
"Logging could be better in terms of sending more logs to Cisco Firepower or Cisco ASA. That's an area where it could be made better."
"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."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"Unified threat management (UTM) integration."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."
"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"I want Webroot to be easier to use and set up. It is not very intuitive."
"I'm not happy with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, for only one reason. It seems that it slows down my interface when I'm doing programming in Microsoft Access, tremendously."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"You must make monthly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. There are no extra charges apart from the standard licensing fees associated with the product."
"...the licensing needs to be improved. All the product features we need are there. It's just a matter of the complexity and the different offerings and trying to figure things out."
"Cisco's pricing is reasonable. We also do not need to opt for niche players, which would have charged us significantly more than Cisco for ecosystem solutions. We are highly satisfied with the pricing structure of Cisco's solutions they are reasonable."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"The price is very good."
"The pricing and licensing of the security solutions of Cisco are very good in comparison with the competitors, but sometimes, it's difficult to see all the discounts and other kinds of things. So, you have to be careful, but the pricing is good."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"With Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, I can select a yearly billing cycle."
"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."
"Get a trial, then a multi-year license."
"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."
"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."
"The pricing is high."
"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."
"The solution is pretty cheap, actually. At our level, which is at 2,500 endpoints, we're paying 87 cents an agent per month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
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.
841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.