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

CrowdStrike Falcon vs MetaDefender comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 2026

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

CrowdStrike Falcon
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
137
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (6th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (1st), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (1st), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (1st), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (1st), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
MetaDefender
Ranking in Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
32nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (34th), Anti-Malware Tools (29th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) category, the mindshare of CrowdStrike Falcon is 4.7%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MetaDefender is 1.7%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
CrowdStrike Falcon4.7%
MetaDefender1.7%
Other93.6%
Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP)
 

Featured Reviews

Waleed Omar - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Specialist at Arab Open University
Provides effective real-time threat detection with potential for cost optimization
Some features such as device control, firewall management, and file analysis are standalone products that we need to purchase separately. If these features came out of the box within the product, it would be much more beneficial for us. Other providers such as SentinelOne include these features in their base product. We attended a CrowdStrike Falcon event where they discussed some shallow AI features, but we cannot see these in our panel yet. We work with different solutions such as Darktrace and SocRadar, where AI features are automatically displayed in our dashboards after release. However, for CrowdStrike Falcon, we cannot see these features.
Eido Ben Noun - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Architect at Diffiesec
Multi‑engine detection has significantly improved secure file transfers and threat prevention
Some feedback indicated that it takes too much time to configure certain policies because there are many options. Some people appreciate this because you can configure anything, but I believe MetaDefender should have a wizard or general policies that can be used for 80 percent of customers. I use the expanded file type and archive coverage feature sometimes, especially for customers who try to scan large archives with the deep scan capabilities of OPSWAT and Deep CDR. This provides full protection because it scans every single file, but sometimes it takes too long. When discussing CAB files or archives for patching or server updates and BIOS updates and operating system updates, the scanning process takes too long, and it was difficult for customers who sometimes decided not to scan because the scanning time was excessive. I use the reporting and audit visibility features. Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand. If something requires checking and then referring to documentation to understand it, that is too much for most users. When looking at one of the statistics, you can see how many files have been scanned and then you see a number out of 500 or a different number if you change it. It is not a number of files or scan processes; it is a number of files inside a file. When you scan a PowerPoint presentation file, for example, it counts as forty different files because of all the sub-files. I understand from customers that when they look at the visualization data or statistics, they do not understand what is happening there. Most customers I see do not use the file-based vulnerability assessment feature. It has some good results about vulnerabilities, but I am not certain if it is that helpful because many organizations, when they deploy a file and see that there are vulnerabilities, still deploy it because it is part of the code. It can produce results, but those results do not cause any action. Many products have something more advanced than vulnerabilities and static scoring. They have tools that can inform you about a vulnerability, whether the vulnerability is exploitable, if it is weaponized, and if someone can use this vulnerability in your environment. The file-based vulnerability feature works, but for most people, they do not take any action based on the results or block files because of file-based vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's really good because it can detect anything."
"The most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon is its accuracy."
"CrowdStrike Falcon has positively impacted my organization by providing good protection, logs, and reports, which I find very good."
"The stability is good; we haven't experienced any glitches or bugs."
"It is an easy product to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the machine learning that they use to check certain patterns in the endpoint devices. It checks the whole ecosystem or entire environment."
"CrowdStrike is deployed on every workstation, so policy changes can be enforced on all of them. It lowers the manual work on each of the workstations. It has helped us manage device usage in our environment."
"The solution's most valuable feature is that it is robust and can detect almost every malicious activity that occurs within the endpoint."
"OPSWAT is the best alternative."
"I like the simplicity, the way it works out of the box. It's pretty easy to run and configure. The integration of the network devices with the ICAP server was easily done."
 

Cons

"We sometimes get false positives."
"I would like them to improve the correlation of data in the search algorithms. When we run an investigation, malware, phishing, etc., I want to look at multiple endpoints at once to correlate that data to see the likenesses, e.g., how are they not alike or what systems and processes are running across those systems? I don't want to have to run the same search in their Spotlight module five, 10, 15, or 100 times to get 100 different results, copy that data out, and then correlate it on my own. In a very simple way, I want to be able to load up a comma-delimited list giving me the spotlight data on these X amount of hosts, letting me search for it quickly. We have had to go back to CrowdStrike, and say, "Our search are taking far too long for even one host." They did bump up the cores and that did improve performance, but it is still kind of slow to get that Spotlight data. That is probably our biggest pain point. I think that needs some help. I understand this kind of information access is probably not the easiest thing to do. It is probably a big ask depending on how their back-end is setup."
"The solution should have included remote wipe capability out of the box."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's GUI requires improvement for user-friendliness."
"For further improvements, I can only think of one example because this is very important for us; they could reduce the price. Then it would deserve a rating of seven."
"The solution could improve by providing more types of reports because it's in the detection span you cannot re-export anything. If it could be exported to a CSV file directly there it would help a lot. I currently need to do this by API to get what I need."
"I would rate it an eight out of ten. It does what it needs to do but there's always room for improvement."
"Tighter integration around XDR could be included."
"Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand."
"The documentation is not well written, and I often need to talk with support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CrowdStrike Falcon is one of the more expensive endpoint solutions on the market."
"The price is high in comparison to similar brands."
"The pricing of CrowdStrike Falcon is competitive."
"CrowdStrike Falcon offers excellent value for the money for our organization, particularly given our lean IT team."
"The cost of CrowdStrike Falcon could be reduced. It is quite expensive if you compare it to other solutions, such as Blue Coat, Symantec, McAfee, or Kaspersky."
"Crowdstrike Falcon is relatively cheap."
"The pricing is good and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Our licensing fees were between $50,000 and $60,000 per year, which was pretty expensive for a small business."
"We bought a three-year license, and that was pretty expensive. We agreed that it was really worth buying. It could be cheaper, but we understand that quality comes at a price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) solutions are best for your needs.
883,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Healthcare Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise62
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with Darktrace?
Both of these products perform similarly and have many outstanding attributes. CrowdStrike Falcon offers an amazing user interface that makes setup easy and seamless. CrowdStrike Falcon offers a cl...
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 ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MetaDefender?
The pricing of MetaDefender is about hundreds of dollars. If I remember correctly, when someone attempted to buy from us one instance of OPSWAT, it was about nine thousand dollars for multi-scannin...
What needs improvement with MetaDefender?
Some feedback indicated that it takes too much time to configure certain policies because there are many options. Some people appreciate this because you can configure anything, but I believe MetaD...
What is your primary use case for MetaDefender?
I have used MetaDefender for one and a half years, deploying it in different environments and managing a team of professional services that deploy MetaDefender products in customer environments. I ...
 

Also Known As

CrowdStrike Falcon XDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Threat Intelligence, CrowdStrike Identity Protection, CrowdStrike Falcon Surface, CrowdStrike Falcon Platform
OPSWAT MetaDefender, MetaDefender Core
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike Falcon vs. MetaDefender and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
883,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.