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

Forescout Platform vs Microsoft Defender for IoT 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

Forescout Platform
Ranking in IoT Security
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Compliance (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (16th)
Microsoft Defender for IoT
Ranking in IoT Security
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Operational Technology (OT) Security (6th), Microsoft Security Suite (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the IoT Security category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 15.6%, down from 19.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for IoT is 9.8%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IoT Security
 

Featured Reviews

Odai Halawani - PeerSpot reviewer
It's an easy and effective solution, especially for device profiling without agents
Forescout Platform's most valuable aspect is its excellent device profiling for devices without agents, which is crucial for our work due to challenges with agent-based devices. Its isolation and blocking actions are particularly effective for network security. The device compliance feature helps us ensure device compliance through immediate actions like updating antivirus software. We have already integrated Forescout with antivirus and vulnerability assessment tools, allowing it to monitor vulnerability scores and automatically isolate devices if critical vulnerabilities are detected.
William Tuleja - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration with existing tools boosts management efficiency
The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong. Often, it just links back to a generic KB article without additional information. When it happens, it requires extra detective work. This issue doesn't occur often but can be annoying.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"When users don't have the required updates, security patches, and antivirus, the tool blocks them from our network."
"The best parts of Forescout Platform are its orchestration features, discovery capabilities, classification buckets, and flexibility in creating policies."
"Forescout has a feature that blocks the endpoint at the point of collection. It sets preconditions and will block the system if those aren't met."
"Ease of deployment There's a great support team that becomes actively engaged whenever we encounter issues. Their technical support is amazing. Good documentation is available. The product is stable. The solution is highly scalable. I recommend using the solution because it gives verified control over the environment. It has a great visibility feature."
"It's one of the tools that has given the federal government visibility into network devices and everything."
"Provides a good overview of all devices on a network."
"We think it's simple. We think it's very useful and we really like reports and everything."
"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"I find Microsoft Defender very effective in vulnerability management and it provides good attack reduction, making it a next-generation protection solution."
"It is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"Mainly, it is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"I believe it is best suited for cloud services and is unmatched by other cloud security solutions."
 

Cons

"The system controls could be better."
"More detailed analysis during the authentication process, especially for troubleshooting access issues. We have found that troubleshooting RADIUS controls is quite arduous, as it is today. A trace function could easily resolve this by providing a means by which access issues from a certificate to passwords or accounts could easily be identified and remediated."
"The solution should include integration with other firewalls."
"I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable."
"The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down."
"The solution could always improve by adding more features to make it more robust."
"Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions."
"Custom integrations need to be better."
"Customer service and support from Microsoft are costly. The execution by engineers is expensive, and the service is neither free nor toll-free, making it less accessible for customers."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
"The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a very clear licensing model for business. I don't have to have a Ph.D. to be able to understand the licensing model as you might need for other solutions. If I know exactly what we want, it can tell you which license you need. The solution is easy for purchasing, ordering, and ease of deployment as well."
"We went with the virtual appliance option. The biggest cost to running these types of appliances would be to either have multiple virtual appliances at every data center or running Remote SPAN hardware to provide you the real-time network visibility."
"We need to pay for integration for each integration that we want to do and there is an additional license fee. This adds more costs. It is not something that anyone can afford. If you want to integrate this with a lot of other tools, it can be costly."
"Forescout Platform is on the expensive side."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. We have paid for the license for five years. We have integration with Symantec AV for orchestration, and we have an additional license."
"The cost of the solution depends on the customer's requirement because the customer is asking for different integration with a different product. Forescout Platform's price would start to get a bit higher. However, overall the price is a little expensive. It's can fit within the customer budget."
"The solution is not priced low. There are no hidden costs."
"Forescout is more expensive than Cisco because Cisco gives high discounts."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IoT Security solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
33%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
Forescout is a very powerful NAC product that does not rely on port level configuration. It can detect and block unauthorized devices very quickly. But it has a lot of capabilities and really would...
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I would rate the Forescout Device and Visibility Control Platform at a six out of ten.
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I recommend doing a compression demo. If people use it, they will buy it. So they have to see the product in place. That's the main recommendation is to do a proof of concept. If they do, they will...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
The solution is relatively expensive with licensing being based on each device. The cost per license might not be affordable for every organization, and I would rate it around six out of ten on a s...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for IoT?
The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies. Microsoft needs flexibility to ensure good compatibility with new IoT solutions, which frequently introduc...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
My primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT is security. It helps with vulnerability management and provides significant attack reduction. It functions as a next-generation protection soluti...
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
Azure Defender for IoT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forescout Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for IoT and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.