We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX and CrowdStrike Falcon based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cisco SecureX earns high marks for its automated utilities, comprehensive visibility, and seamless integration with external resources. CrowdStrike Falcon stands out for its minimal impact on system performance, optimal resource utilization, and precise detection of threats. Users say Cisco SecureX needs better documentation and integration with on-premises systems. It would also benefit by expanding its compatibility with third-party solutions. CrowdStrike Falcon could benefit from adding a sandbox feature and more detailed firewall management options.
Service and Support: Some users describe Cisco support as dependable and efficient, while others noted a decline in quality due to personnel changes. CrowdStrike Falcon's customer service is considered prompt and helpful.
Ease of Deployment: Setting up Cisco SecureX is generally considered to be straightforward in cloud environments, but it requires more effort to integrate the solution with on-premise products. CrowdStrike Falcon's setup is considered to be simple and efficient, with deployment times ranging from a few days to a month. While there may be some challenges during installation, they are generally manageable.
Pricing: A few users said Cisco SecureX’s price could be lower, given that it is included for free with certain Cisco products. Some users find CrowdStrike Falcon costly and think the price should be lowered to make it more competitive.
ROI: Cisco SecureX provides a positive ROI by speeding up detection and resolution. It also decreases workloads through automation and proactive information gathering. CrowdStrike Falcon offers cost savings by decreasing the required number of engineers and eliminating the need for onsite servers.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer CrowdStrike Falcon over Cisco SecureX. Users particularly commend CrowdStrike Falcon for its efficient resource utilization, accurate threat detection, and robust defense against cyberattacks. They also value its seamless integration capabilities and user-friendly interface. Cisco SecureX users reported challenges with on-prem integration and observed a need for more third-party integration.
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that Microsoft Defender XDR is easy to integrate with other Microsoft platforms or products."
"The incident threat response and its ability to facilitate effective remediation against threats are the standout features."
"The most valuable features are spam filtering, attachment filtering, and antivirus protection."
"A crucial aspect for our team is the inclusion of identity and access management tools from the vendor."
"We also use Microsoft Sentinel, Defender for Cloud, Defender for Identity, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. They are all integrated and it was very easy to integrate them. In my experience with the integrations, it was just a click of a button and things were integrated. It's just a button."
"I have found the ability to delete unwanted threats beneficial."
"Defender is easy to use. It has a nice console, and everything is all in one place."
"One of the most valuable features is the simplicity of deploying SecureX. It's very easy to do that and then you gain very detailed visibility into everything that's going on in your network and, obviously, at the device level. There's just a wealth of information that you can pull from all of these products that are part of SecureX. You know exactly if you have an issue or not."
"I like that I don't have to jump around to five different products and log into five different places to view the data that it returns."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"The automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
"Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"Our customers find the product's third-party integrations valuable. Our customers are also impressed with the tool's capability to pick up third-party threat feeds and use that as part of the decision-making process."
"The malware protection is the most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon."
"The solution has improved my organization by automating the detection and reporting of unwanted applications so we're aware of them and can respond appropriately."
"The anomaly detection is the most valuable feature."
"Scalability is good. We have had no issues with it."
"It helps us to identify the threats according to the behavior of any process that is running on any particular system. It helps immensely to identify any malicious behavior on any endpoints."
"The initial setup is a very fast process."
"We like Falcon's network visibility. We can see how threats are evolving on PCS or in the company network. The solution's real-time incident response is very fast."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The management and automation of the cloud apps have room for improvement."
"365 Defender has multiple subsets, including Defender for Cloud Apps. When integrating Defender for Cloud Apps with apps on third-party cloud platforms like AWS or GCP, there are limitations on our ability to control user activities. If Microsoft added more control over third-party products, that would be a game-changer and help us quite a lot."
"Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation."
"Advanced attacks could use an improvement."
"Correctly updated records are the most significant area for improvement. There have been times when we were notified of a required fix; we would carry out the fix and confirm it but still get the same notification a week later. This seems to be a delay in records being updated and leads to false reporting, which is something that needs to be fixed."
"The design of the user interface could use some work. Sometimes it's hard to find the exact information you need."
"The licensing is a nightmare and has room for improvement."
"This solution could be improved if it included features such as those offered by Malwarebytes."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"I would like it to integrate with another solution, e.g., DNA. I would like it to connect to that solution, but not the security aspect."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler. It could be that all the other parts are that easy to use so that these stick out as a negative, but that's the trickiest part for us. The workflows within the orchestration are just a bit more difficult."
"They could expand into more areas. The more third-parties that we have tied into it, the better. The capabilities are there. As they just continue to involve the product, the more things that you can look into, then the more analytics that you can get. Also, the more data that we can get, then the better off we will be."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"We can't do scanning audits or device blocking or application control."
"CrowdStrike Falcon could improve by having an easier way to search and use the interface for extracting queries from the data. The interface could improve."
"The technical support team often just replies to an issue with a link to an article rather than actually calling back and talking to someone and making sure the problem is solved. To me, that's kind of weak."
"The content-filtering features for children could be improved. We have young grandchildren aged 12 and 8. My daughter, their mother, wants to keep them from getting in trouble on the net. She looked at all these other solutions from Google, Microsoft, etc., and she couldn't figure out how to make any of those work. I told her that I bet CrowdStrike could handle this. Sure enough, CrowdStrike can do exactly that. It's the same solution that the Defense Department gets. It works, but it's a little complicated to implement. It could be simpler to set the policies."
"In terms of features, I would like them to add detailed logging functionality in CrowdStrike. Currently, CrowdStrike detects the threats immediately based on the IOCs and the signature-based policies or many threat behaviors, but in terms of logging those threats, it is not very good. The information that they provide in the logs is very little. They can build more analytics into it."
"The console is a little cluttered and at times, finding what you're looking for is not intuitive."
"We encounter occasional issues, such as when disabling network access for a host that uses CrowdStrike."
"CrowdStrike Falcon could improve the EDR functionality. Once the functionality of the solution improves, it will be even better in the market and able to compete with Carbon Black."
Cisco SecureX is ranked 13th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 13 reviews while CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 1st in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 107 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco SecureX writes "Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". Cisco SecureX is most compared with Trend Vision One, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Splunk SOAR, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Wazuh, whereas CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security, Trend Vision One and Fortinet FortiEDR. See our Cisco SecureX vs. CrowdStrike Falcon report.
See our list of best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
