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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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

Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (16th)
Kaspersky Endpoint Security...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
121
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Compliance (2nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is 3.7%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.
Ahmed El Kayal - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly interface simplifies management while performance issues during scanning need addressing
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is easy to implement and has a user-friendly interface. It stands out as an antivirus and malware protection solution due to its extensive feeds and resources for antivirus signatures. These capabilities enable effective malware protection. Additionally, it offers scalability as any endpoint added to Active Directory can be easily integrated by Kaspersky Security Center. Its straightforward deployment and ease of management are other valuable features. It does not require an advanced engineer to manage, and resources are readily available online, making it accessible and scalable.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its false positives are very low, because the behavior analysis engine double checks them."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"It's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
"Instead of having features like rollback and after-event actionable stuff, the whole premise and the context of the solution is to actually prevent these malicious attacks from happening to begin with.... The ability to prevent threats is the most appealing aspect. It absolutely, 100 percent helps with real-time prevention of unknown malware. That's the strength of the product."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"I like how it protects the network and all the endpoints."
"The security is very good, compared to some other products."
"The malware threat detection has been excellent overall."
"The security and vulnerability assessment features are valuable."
"It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that the application control is very good."
"Kaspersky Enterprise solution's combined protections have helped to block a lot of malware which would have caused a lot of interruptions in our operations."
"The setup and implementation are easy."
 

Cons

"The Management Console is not localized."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"When I do a malware scan on my computer it takes a long while. This process could improve in the future. Additionally, the security could improve."
"Kaspersky could be improved by better malware protection. They have to take advantage of Malwarebytes and integrate the same engine inside Kaspersky. I use Malwarebytes as well because Kaspersky doesn't always detect malware."
"I would like to see better-enhanced features, such as protection against ransomware and different types of malicious malware."
"It is not very good for the performance of the system, and especially with older devices, it has a noticeable impact."
"It would be beneficial to have more robust cloud management capabilities for Endpoint."
"We are having some troubles because some American companies we work with don't want to work with Kaspersky."
"There should be some AI involved. We already have machine learning involved in recent releases but machine learning should be more enhanced in the upcoming versions."
"The UI, user interface, could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"One thing about their licensing program that I like is that just one covers the server as well as on the endpoint as well as mobile devices. There is no complexity in calculating how many SKUs I need for mobile, for laptop, for desktop, and for servers. It's very simple and that makes it much easier to budget."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. It is less costly compared to competitors."
"It would be beneficial if the price could be reduced, and improved management of the license allocation for adding additional Endpoint users would be advantageous."
"We pay a yearly annual subscription for this product."
"The solution requires a license and there are different license packages depending on the number of users you need."
"It is a cost-effective endpoint security service."
"The licensing is affordable. We bought a three-year license. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard license fees."
"Licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Educational Organization
58%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
4%
Financial Services Firm
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Security?
Kaspersky needs to improve its security techniques as it has not been in Gartner records for the last two years. There is also a need to enhance its behavior analytics and integration capabilities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business?
The pricing and licensing cost of Kaspersky Endpoint Security is cheaper compared to Trend Micro.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Kaspersky Work Space Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ACMS, Arqiva, Pakistan International Airlines, RAO UES
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.