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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Fidelis Elevate 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

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
Fidelis Elevate
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
37th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Threat Deception Platforms (6th), SSL/TLS Decryption (2nd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (14th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (25th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.1%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Chad Kliewer - PeerSpot reviewer
We can make more informed decisions on whether an action is malicious
The ease of use and dashboards are improving. We came in at a time when they were developing a new dashboard screen. Therefore, we have had some confusing times between the old and new dashboards. Knowing how the new one works, I have seen vast improvements with it. While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper. They are improving on this because I have seen some improvements in the user interface that helps with this. Part of it was moving two different screens into one, merging the two together. It is very good, but it is very technically detailed and would be harder for an entry-level person to decipher. However, improvements are being made. It leverages indicators of behavior to help us remediate faster against attacks. Sometimes, I wish there was more detail on why they consider it malicious.
Mostafa Ameen - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations
The initial aspect concerns two engines. The first one mentioned is available for searching behaviors directly. The second engine involves the Google Ade tool, which operates on the machine. The challenge arises when attempting to rectify protection rules, causing confusion. It would be beneficial to enhance Rigixs Query. I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
 

Cons

"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"I would like to see improvements on the operational side, specifically in grouping."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"The pricing is manageable."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"You license by the number of days of logs you need to maintain visibility for. Forty-five days is a good solid number for a company with around a 10k user base."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use it to improve detection in the whole industrial sector. We are a big energy company. Across multiple endpoints, we deploy the EDR to secure all, improve detection, and also attempt to automa...
What do you like most about Fidelis Elevate?
It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fidelis Elevate?
It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high. We lose customers for price. It's not always worth it for them. Even for enterprise...
What needs improvement with Fidelis Elevate?
The initial aspect concerns two engines. The first one mentioned is available for searching behaviors directly. The second engine involves the Google Ade tool, which operates on the machine. The ch...
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
Fidelis Elevate Platform, Fidelis Enterprise, Fidelis Cloud, Fidelis Managed Detection and Response, Fidelis Deception, Fidelis Decryption, Fidelis Endpoint, Fidelis Network
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
First Midwest Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Fidelis Elevate and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.