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

Code42 Incydr vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
Code42 Incydr offers cost savings, enhanced security, reduced downtime, and increased productivity, leading to a high return on investment.
Sentiment score
7.2
Users report positive ROI from Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, citing cost savings, improved security, and effective system integration.
The return on investment is primarily in time savings and better observability of what's happening.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.8
Code42 Incydr's customer service is highly praised for its responsiveness, professionalism, clear communication, expert support, and comprehensive resources.
Sentiment score
6.6
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's support is generally reliable, with mixed reviews on response time and resolution quality.
I rate Microsoft support 10 out of 10.
Due to our size, we don't have access to direct technical support, but the knowledge base, Microsoft Learn, and the articles available are really good.
The level-one support seems disconnected from subject matter experts.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Code42 Incydr is highly scalable and integrates seamlessly, with minor setup issues but reliable performance for growing and established businesses.
Sentiment score
7.6
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers scalable integration and cloud-based management, but customization may need extra tools in complex settings.
We managed to scale it out in a short amount of time, with two months of planning and three months of implementation on 10,000 computers.
Defender's scalability is phenomenal, and it's going to be one of the keys to resolving issues for the SOC.
It's pretty easy to scale with Microsoft, as they make it easy if you look into the documentation.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
Code42 Incydr is highly reliable and stable, with users rarely encountering any issues, bugs, crashes, or glitches.
Sentiment score
7.9
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is stable, integrates well with Windows, but occasionally has configuration and memory issues.
I rate Defender 10 out of 10 for stability.
Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable.
I haven't seen any outages with Microsoft.
 

Room For Improvement

Code42 Incydr could enhance support, efficiency, and features, especially for newcomers and those relying on content-specific filtering.
Users criticize Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's complex interface, limited integration, and request enhancements in analytics, protection, and support.
Repeated interactions are necessary due to Level One's lack of tools and knowledge, hindering efficient problem-solving and negatively impacting our experience with Microsoft support.
We have multiple endpoints, and we want to look for signals across tenants.
An additional feature that could be included in the next release is free Copilot.
 

Setup Cost

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers flexible, cost-effective pricing, especially in E5 bundles, adapting to various enterprise licensing needs.
Given our extensive Microsoft licensing, transitioning to Defender for Endpoint did not affect licensing costs.
The pricing, setup, and licensing were very easy and simple.
 

Valuable Features

Code42 Incydr is user-friendly, offers continuous backups, excellent visibility for remote workforces, and customizable risk-scoring with minimal resource use.
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides comprehensive cybersecurity with seamless integration, robust threat analytics, and efficient management across platforms without performance impact.
Defender for Endpoint's coverage across different platforms in our environment is pretty good. We have devices running Linux, Mac OS, Windows, iOS, and Android. It covers all of them.
Attack surface reduction and limiting attack surface vectors are valuable features.
The notification and reporting features are most valuable because we are part of a compliance project, and maintaining SOC 2 compliance is critical.
 

Categories and Ranking

Code42 Incydr
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
53rd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (56th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (26th)
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
190
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Code42 Incydr is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 12.5%, down from 17.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Chuck_Mackey - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support
In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue. It really has to do with the overall infrastructure and what the organization is prepared to do. If the infrastructure or the networking is a little hinky or you don't have a really finely tuned network infrastructure environment and your patches aren't up to date on your servers and your endpoints, it could get a little sticky. Other than that, it was okay. We really didn't have much problem beyond that. It took a couple of days to sort that out, but it was no big deal.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to update with good protection and a useful cloud portal
We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. The malware protection is good. The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively. We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it. It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well. The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning. Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there. While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%. While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Educational Organization
27%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
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 Code42 Next-Gen DLP?
Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details.
What advice do you have for others considering Code42 Next-Gen DLP?
If you come with the perception that this solution uses the same policies that are used in traditional DLP products, you might find Code42 doesn't work for you. You have to adapt to their philosoph...
What needs improvement with Code42 Incydr?
The solution has been designed for a different approach than the one followed by other DLP solutions in the market. Most of us who come from the mindset of filtering out incidents using a content-s...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?
We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior solution. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security s...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
 

Also Known As

Code42 Next-Gen DLP, Code42 Next-Gen Data Loss Protection, Code42 Forensic File Search, Code42 Backup + Restore
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Learn More

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Adobe, Okta, Samsung, Taylormade, Boston University, Lending Club, North Highland, Stanford University, Ping Identity, Qualcomm, Pandora.
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Code42 Incydr vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.