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

HP Wolf Security vs Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response 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

HP Wolf Security
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
3.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (31st)
Kaspersky Endpoint Detectio...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of HP Wolf Security is 2.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is 1.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

BH
Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments
The tool's deployment is easy. HP Wolf Security's deployment was a swift process since it was initially compatible with Windows 10, the operating system on both machines. However, when I transitioned to Windows 11, I encountered minor issues that prompted me to delve deeper into Wolf Security to fine-tune security settings according to my preferences. While I mostly used default settings, there was an initial adjustment where I disabled the AI function related to malware. Currently, the system is running smoothly with no reported issues. Adjusting some settings raised concerns about compatibility between HP Wolf Security and Norton 360. Specifically, aspects of HP Wolf Security, such as the virtual machine component, intrigued me, but I hesitated due to potential conflicts. During my investigation, Windows 11 raised a flag, questioning the system's security settings with Norton 360 and HP Wolf Security. However, it seems that they coexist well without causing issues.
FarkhundAbbas - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis
Kaspersky's support team is not that much supportive. If we need any help from them, they do not provide a good solution, and it takes too long to resolve the issue. This is the main thing because some cases are easy and need urgent resolution. However, when we create a support ticket, it takes three days to get it planned, and we have urgent requirements. So, the ticketing process needs improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."
"Now, instead of us having to go through that analysis, they actually give us a monthly report that shows us: "Here's what you got hit with, here's what would have happened, here are the forensics behind the attack," and, obviously, Bromium stopped it."
"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."
"I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
"The product is integrated with endpoint protection. We don't have to implement a separate technology. It provides visibility over the endpoints."
"We have a concept of working from home. Most endpoints are not in the domain. It is our first line of defense. While we had Kaspersky deployed, it gave good insight into the upcoming challenge or threat."
"One of the good features is the provider's Faulting capability. If any of our systems detect malware, we can check the behavior of the malware by sending it to Kaspersky's sandbox environment. This helps us assess how destructive the malware is. After analyzing it, we can create use cases and protection measures based on that behavior. So, this is the best feature of Kaspersky."
"The tool is easy to use."
"Kaspersky EDR is far superior to other products. It gives detailed information about malware, geolocation, and more. Also, the agent itself is very lightweight compared to other products. The packages and updates were quite small in size, just a few KBs."
"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
 

Cons

"The tool behaves differently when I ported to Windows 11."
"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. We do mine the data that's in there from a forensics perspective... It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data. Reporting is absolutely the biggest shortcoming."
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"They have always struggled with usability. The protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer. It's gotten a lot better now with Win 10. But sometimes, when you open up a website, it's going to take longer than it would without Bromium, and it's the same with documents."
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability. It works well with attacks, but it doesn't work well with all software on the clients. There is a lot of troubleshooting and a lot of things that need to be tuned to make it work and not break things."
"I did not find this to be an out-of-the-box solution, it required planning and alignment across many groups."
"When you deploy, not only is the user asked to reboot their computer, they are also asked to wait for 20 minutes while it sits there and initializes. It definitely impacts the end-user. It takes time away from their day."
"Initially, when we came in contact with Bromium a few years ago, it had a nice threat analyst, or a LAVA Pop, which is what they used to call it. Once it detected malware, it would show us the malware's path... I don't see that on the computers now. We only get to see that in the console. I would like to still see that on the individual machines because when we go out to look at a machine, we don't necessarily have access to the console."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement in its user interface."
"I want to be able to use the product as a patch management tool for my endpoints since it is an area that is not working effectively for me."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive. It should improve its stability."
"The product does not detect zero-day threats."
"The main issue was compatibility with the cloud itself. The CPU usage immediately spiked, causing the machines to hang and sometimes even forcing server or computer restarts."
"One of the main areas where the tool could improve is its integration capabilities. For example, I find it challenging to integrate it with other solutions. It would be helpful if the tool could make it more open to integration with other tools."
"My team was struggling with the reporting when we were doing an audit. The console features are a little more interactive and user-friendly. There's some issue, or maybe some fixing has to be done."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product came as a bundle with the machine."
"The pricing is very fair compared to the competition. The licensing is straightforward."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"I think the pricing is a good value. All of these security products are always going to be very expensive, but I don't think Bromium is unreasonable. I think Bromium is decently priced. It’s a tiered licensing platform. The more you buy, the cheaper gets per unit, and I think their tiers are very well defined. I think they're fair."
"The product's pricing is a good value. We only run it on our internet-facing workstations, we don't run it on everything in our environment. We are very selective. Some organizations may want to consider doing something like that to reduce their license count."
"I would say that their pricing is generally competitive and attractive."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The product is cheap."
"It is cost-effective in terms of services and features compared to other more expensive EDR solutions like CrowdStrike and Trend Micro."
"I was satisfied with the pricing of Kaspersky."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
"The tool's pricing was high during the last renewal."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing costs of the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Retailer
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HP Wolf Security?
The tool behaves differently when I ported to Windows 11.
What is your primary use case for HP Wolf Security?
I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments.
What do you like most about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky has a better price than other marketplace solutions. Due to this, they are growing significantly. I like the price. I'd rate it nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Cortex is better in the security features, yet Cortex doesn't have IT management features like Kaspersky. Kaspersky is not an XDR solution. With an XDR solution, we could gain some more time.
 

Also Known As

Bromium vSentry
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Valspar
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about HP Wolf Security vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,476 professionals have used our research since 2012.