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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 13, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
35th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
1st
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
190
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 11.3%, down from 15.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"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."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The solution is efficient."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes pre-installed in Microsoft Windows."
"Defender for Endpoint has significantly improved our security posture."
"It's effective against most types of infection, and the firewall is perfect for protection."
"The visibility into threats that the solution provides is pretty awesome... This is something that makes me think, "Wow, okay. If I had my own organization, I would probably get this too." It stops the threat before an employee gets phished or something gets downloaded to their computer."
"One feature I like the most is vulnerability management, which shows any vulnerable software or OS present in my environment. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a complete overview and also recommends the steps to mitigate the vulnerabilities or threats. Most of the other antivirus or EDR solutions generally don't provide vulnerability management. It is an add-on that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides."
"It performs well. The stability is seamless."
"It is a very advanced system based on AI. It has a very large database of places or sites on the internet where you should not go. It is continuously online."
"There are a couple of features, such as isolating the devices or connecting the device and connecting live response."
 

Cons

"They need to improve their technical support services."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"Its detection is not as quick. There should also be more frequent updates."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is not as robust, and you cannot customize it much, so that's a challenge."
"The UI for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint needs to be better. Integration with client dashboards is also lacking in this product, e.g. client dashboards shouldn't just be viewable from the cloud, because when the client's computer is offline, you won't be able to see the client dashboard."
"The time it takes to implement policies has room for improvement."
"Microsoft support could be more knowledgeable."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"We encountered some issues when we were trying to enable automatic updates from our group policy."
"There are alternative solutions that offer a greater range of dashboard insights when compared to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"The pricing is manageable."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"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."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"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."
"Even if you are not registered as a not-for-profit, the offering that they have is definitely worth consideration. This is in the sense that the E5 stack just gives you so many benefits. You get your entire productivity suite through Microsoft 365 apps. You get all your security and identity protection. You get the Defender for Endpoint and Defender for Identity. You get the cloud access security broker as well. You get Azure Active Directory Premium P2, which gives you so many good things that you can configure and deploy. You don't have to configure them on day one, but you have access to so many different tools that will protect your data, security, endpoints, and identities that you could build out a security strategy 18 months long, and slowly work your way through it, based on what you have available to you through your license."
"Licensing fees are paid annually through a partner."
"They are now doing it on an endpoint basis. It is based on the number of endpoints, which is good."
"You need a license to use this solution."
"Everybody would like to see a lower price on everything. The Slovenian market is basically an SME market with clients having up to 100 seat licenses, comprising 90% of the company. They're very price sensitive. So, the price could be cheaper."
"The price is higher than others because it is doing more than what the others are doing."
"As we operate in the educational sector, we are eligible for an educational discount."
"There is an annual license required."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
825,661 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
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 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 the product for enhancing security postures by leveraging behavioral analytics and security engines effectively minimizing false positives and detecting threats.
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

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
825,661 professionals have used our research since 2012.