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

Expel vs Field Effect MDR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Expel
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
SOC as a Service (5th)
Field Effect MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Managed Detection and Response (MDR) category, the mindshare of Expel is 2.1%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Field Effect MDR is 3.2%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed Detection and Response (MDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Field Effect MDR3.2%
Expel2.1%
Other94.7%
Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2578461 - PeerSpot reviewer
Rapid threat management and diverse technology integration for effective monitoring
Expel has made it easier for companies to monitor and manage various log sources. With its vast integration portfolio, customers can efficiently monitor diverse environments. Time to value is quick, as Expel can turn their service up very rapidly. They have both automated active responses and human processes that quicken threat resolution.
Anmol Nagpal - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective MDR with great support and an easy setup
The feature I've found the move valuable is the 24/7 monitoring. We are a small organization that supports a LOT of endpoints and clients. Without this tool, it would be impossible for us to confidently tell clients that we are secure. Alongside this, the ability for Field Effect to make decisions on its own based on what it has learned from all the "training data" that we have provided in the past. It will only get better over time. We have had some false positives; for example, using a legitimate networking scanning tool from the terminal has been blocked. However, we were actually impressed when something so simple was caught!

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Their threat hunting protocol and process with AI and machine learning are strong, allowing for active and rapid responses."
"I appreciate the "set it and forget it" nature of Field Effect Covalence."
"Covalence's cloud protection element has been excellent. A lot of organizations are using 365. It's hard to find a secure solution for protecting accounts. We've gone down the path of trying to utilize other security solutions for that particular area. We've been disappointed and always come back to trying to implement Covalence when we can so we know people are safe."
"What I like the most about Field Effect Covalence is the ease of deployment, the fact that it's cost-effective to roll out, and it is reasonable."
"One of the most useful and impressive features of the system is its detailed notification mechanism."
"We now have a single cybersecurity product that protects all of our threat services, and all the endpoints."
"There are user notifications about our cloud solutions and access, meaning authentication and possible breaches. Overall, the notifications and alerts are valuable. There are also new features like the DNS protection, which is quite good."
"The most valuable feature is the network traffic monitoring function."
"The most valuable features are AROs, which provide timely notifications for out-of-compliance or out-of-specification detections."
 

Cons

"The one area where Expel may not measure up is if a customer requires a managed SIEM as part of their overall solution. There's a gap there, and solutions might require third-party assistance for management."
"While the reporting is good, I would like more of a white-label option with my company's name at the top and a clean look for the report."
"It would be greatly beneficial to integrate compliance-related reporting directly into the portal."
"They put too much detail into the emails."
"There are tags for security threats, but I only view them. I do not action anything. I just see what is happening. Sometimes, they are a little bit vague, and I am unsure what they mean, so I leave that to the IT experts. Overall, we are quite satisfied with their product and how it is working."
"Covalence's SEAS feature wasn't very user-friendly."
"Because this is a security solution, I would recommend that they extend their support hours, and perhaps for emergencies, even to 24/7 or 24/5."
"In the AROs tab, if we encounter multiple duplicate recommendations, it would be helpful to be able to select and resolve or dismiss them all at once."
"I would like Covalence to implement patch management as well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is a little pricey. It is a little on the high end, but we are continuing to use it. We signed the contract and have not canceled, so we find value in having it."
"We were particularly impressed with their pricing model, which charges per user rather than per system."
"The pricing is comparable to what else is out there."
"Although Covalence is expensive, it provides good value for the price."
"Field Effect Covalence's pricing is just right."
"The shift to a per-user pricing model and the introduction of a base price for the on-premises or virtual appliance has been particularly advantageous."
"The cost of the solution is high."
"The pricing isn't sized, so Field Effect doesn't make it easy for anything under 25 users. I'm not crazy about that."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
49%
Retailer
5%
Outsourcing Company
4%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Expel?
Expel's pricing has adapted as the market evolved and has become competitive over the past twelve months.
What needs improvement with Expel?
The one area where Expel may not measure up is if a customer requires a managed SIEM as part of their overall solution. There's a gap there, and solutions might require third-party assistance for m...
What is your primary use case for Expel?
I have experience reselling Expel. Customers often come to me wanting to evaluate multiple providers to make a choice based on their specific use cases, requirements, technology investments, and so...
What do you like most about Field Effect Covalence?
It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Field Effect Covalence?
Pricing was initially a concern, but the recent updates have resolved that by offering a more accessible buying cost.
What needs improvement with Field Effect Covalence?
One way Field Effect MDR can be improved is through its licensing process, which is not ideal. The licensing process is difficult because I have to access a separate website to complete it.
 

Also Known As

Workbench, Expel SOC-as-a-Service
Field Effect Covalence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amanda Fennell CSO
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Huntress, Field Effect and others in Managed Detection and Response (MDR). Updated: September 2025.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.