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

Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cybereason Next-Generation ...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
186
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (2nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (2nd), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus is 0.5%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 19.9%, down from 24.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 21, 2023
With great technical support and reasonable scalability options, the tool efficiently detects unknown threats
My company does face some issues with the solution due to certain interoperability. I wouldn't say it is not a stable solution, but as soon as you have another software in the environment, the solution tends to have some issues. A lot of the issues faced in the solution can be fixed with the help of whitelisting and a couple of rules or settings on your own. We have to face the same set of problems with the solution for every instance, so if you have a new client, you have to do the enrollment and admin work again. For every new use case, the creation of a new instance is required. I rate the stability a six out of ten.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 26, 2024
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 tool's detection range works fine. Its most valuable features are its ease of employment and lightweightness. It's not heavy on resources. We focus on malware and ransomware detection."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its AI detection algorithm part, which helps and is Cybereason's way of detecting the unknown, not just the signature-based threats."
"User-friendly, offering safety and security."
"The most important and the most relevant features of Defender for Endpoint are the malware and ransomware protection."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is beneficial because we are using Microsoft Windows and all the core solutions are made by Microsoft, such as the authentic platform, operating system, and antivirus protection. It is a heterogeneous environment. We had to use third-party solutions before and update everything separately. For example, the policy for antivirus. With Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, when Microsoft Windows receives updates it will update with it. This is one main advantage of this solution."
"We use Microsoft Defender for the antivirus."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes pre-installed in Microsoft Windows."
"The investigation aspect is the most useful. It's user friendly and has a good user interface."
"The endpoint detection of threats is valuable. The initial detection of things like ransomware and viruses and being able to shut down machines immediately and stop a threat is valuable. We can stop a threat at a source versus allow it to propagate it across the network."
 

Cons

"Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus is not available in the local language, which can be inconvenient."
"Integrating other tools is sometimes an issue when using Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus."
"There is no behavior analytics for devices and endpoints. There is no behavior-based protection."
"There's a lot of manual effort involved to configure what we need."
"Some of the integrations that Defender should include involve the use of the web app."
"Auto recovery is the most important feature that we would need from this solution. For decryption, similar to Malwarebytes, there should be something to be able to recover the data up to the last normal status. Its ability to recover data to the last normal copy must not exceed 5 to 10 minutes."
"I would like to see improvements made to how it secures activities on web pages."
"Integration with third-party vendors could be better. It would be better if it integrates with other protection solutions or other products outside of Microsoft. Nowadays, anti-virus protection doesn't really have to be planned as overall protection for your environment in terms of security. There are really different avenues that bad actors can take to wreak havoc on your machine."
"I would just like them to have more consistency, and that's a comment that's across the board with Microsoft. They change things a lot."
"I want Microsoft Defender to have the ability to deal with some issues automatically, so I don't need to address that issue manually."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing a four out of ten. Its pricing is justified."
"We have an enterprise agreement so from my perspective, this is a product that ships with Windows and it is not priced standalone."
"The pricing is competitive."
"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."
"We mostly use Microsoft products. We use Office 365, and we use Azure. We're also a Microsoft partner. So, the licensing was much cheaper for us, and at the same time, a lot of the features that we were looking for were included in Defender."
"Licensing options vary. Some customers buy it as an enterprise agreement and pay yearly. Others buy it as a CSP, so they pay per month. It completely depends on the customer's needs."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can be costly as a standalone solution."
"If you don't purchase the advanced threat protection then there is no additional charge."
"Licenses depend upon what you are looking for and what kind of security do you want to implement. There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. When we used to buy Symantec, we used to spend on 100 licenses. We used to spend approximately $2,700 for those many licenses, and they came in packs. To add one more license, I had to buy a pack with a minimum of 10 licenses. I had to spend on nine extra licenses because I can't get a single license, whereas when we go for Microsoft, we can get as many licenses as we want. If I have 100 users today, and tomorrow, I have 90 users, I can release my 10 licenses next month. With any other software vendor, you buy licenses for one year, and you have to stick with that. If today you have 100 licenses, and tomorrow, you have 50, you have already paid for one year's license. You can't go back and tell them that I don't require these 50 licenses because I have lost my 50 users, but with Microsoft Defender, licensing is on a monthly basis. It gives you both options. You can go yearly and save on it, or you can go monthly. You will, again, save on it. It is very fair everywhere."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Non Profit
6%
Educational Organization
26%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
The solution's most valuable feature is its AI detection algorithm part, which helps and is Cybereason's way of detecting the unknown, not just the signature-based threats.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
I rate the solution's pricing a four out of ten. Its pricing is justified.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus is not available in the local language, which can be inconvenient.
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 NGAV
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CONNECTICUT WATER, BEAM SUNTORY, CADWALADER, WICKERSHAM & TAFT, RTI Surgical, HOSPITAL REVENUE CYCLE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, MCBEE ASSOCIATES, FORTUNE 500 BANK
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.