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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

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)
WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 19.9%, down from 24.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus is 0.5%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
MH
Jul 2, 2024
Enables us to manage multiple sites within one console through the cloud
WatchGuard is easy to implement and inexpensive. When we get a bulk-off license, we get a very discounted price that is competitive with alternative or competitor solutions We can manage multiple sites within one console through the cloud. Since WatchGuard acquired Panda, there may be synergies…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's great for investigating what's happening on a machine. They show a whole bunch of machine timeline events that are related to a security incident. They have quite good details on the things related to threat and vulnerability management, such as any weakness that has been disclosed publicly, assets that are exposed, and if there is an exploit active in the wild for that vulnerability. It can provide you with all such information, which is cool."
"The patch management is very easy, as it can be done automatically or added to a schedule."
"Microsoft's technical support is fantastic."
"It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows."
"One of the features which differentiates it from other EDR providers is the Automated Investigation and Response, which reduces the workload of SOC analysts or engineers. They don't have to manually investigate each and every alert on the endpoint, since it does so automatically. And you can automate the investigation part."
"Defender is stable. The performance is good."
"We have just started to implement it. It is useful for protection from malware and ransomware."
"For threat-hunting, I'll put some threats in a test scenario. I've downloaded known viruses that are out in the public for testing. They're not really a virus but they've got a signature. Defender for Endpoint will automatically find those, quarantine them for me, and alert me to what it did. It gives me "automated eyes.""
"WatchGuard is easy to implement and inexpensive. When we get a bulk-off license, we get a very discounted price that is competitive with alternative or competitor solutions."
"It does its job very well, and it is quite easy to put to use."
"The pricing of the solution is okay. It's not the most expensive option."
"It is the most effective on non-encrypted traffic and it is able to determine some threats through deep packet inspection."
"I haven't a problem with anti-virus stability using WatchGuard for over two years."
 

Cons

"My main issue with the tool is that there are too many menus. This causes a steep learning curve for those without training or unfamiliar with Defender for Endpoint. From an end-user perspective, the solution is there on the machine and does its job; it works seamlessly. However, as a security professional dealing with it behind the scenes, the learning curve can be steep, but not too steep. Still, it has taken some of my analysts up to a month to get familiar with the product."
"In terms of improvement, they update the platform it seems quite a bit. Every month something is in a new spot or something changed somewhere. There should be less of that."
"The GUI is very complex and could be more user friendly."
"I would like to see integrations with other products, such as Spunk and other CM solutions. That would create possibilities for me, and for a SOC, to consolidate all events in an older console, not one provided by Microsoft but provided by a third party, and use it to create more insights."
"I wish they would extend the use of the Security Central portal, even for the free option of Defender. Because, as companies grow, it is labor intensive to manage the AV and detection part of it. For companies already subscribed to Office 365, I think this would be a good enhancement."
"I had some cases a while back and told an agent my issue. When I called the next day, I had to explain everything again to a different person, so I found it annoying to repeat myself all over."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by adding more security features."
"With regards to the interface, a challenge I found was that there was not enough documentation on how to tune it. I had to read multiple sources on the internet to learn how to configure the tool appropriately."
"Since WatchGuard acquired Panda, there may be synergies in consolidating both solutions under a single name to reduce customer confusion."
"There were a little bit of problems with the tool's updates, making it an area where improvements are needed."
"It doesn't offer the best protection and it's incompatible with a lot of China's websites. It makes a lot of mistakes when it is detecting items as it's not recognizing items correctly."
"The solution isn't what I would consider feature-rich."
"WatchGuard technical support requires a license."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They are now doing it on an endpoint basis. It is based on the number of endpoints, which is good."
"The licensing costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are reasonable."
"There is no licensing fee."
"It is an expensive solution. It would be nice if it could be included with the Microsoft Office package."
"If we are acquiring everything in a single place, the front end becomes cost-effective."
"Pricing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is competitive. Out of the bundle, you will get a lot of security, if I talk about Microsoft E5, for example, and get a lot of benefits. If the customer goes and purchases a different solution, it will cost more, so pricing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite reasonable at the moment. There isn't any challenge in terms of pricing, for example, I didn't see a customer who pulled back because of the price. Some prices could be negotiable, and sometimes, as a sales point, the two become negotiable, but they don't bill one and pull back because of the pricing. If you have an E5 license, you get everything."
"I don't know the standalone costs. It is my understanding that the M365 E5 is $56 a month or something close to that pricing. That would be for the full suite. Just Defender might be $8 a month. I can't say for sure."
"We pay a yearly license for Microsoft Defender. We also have a support contract with them."
"For what we use, the tool's price has been reasonable, but it is not the cheapest. The tool has been quite reasonable."
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
Educational Organization
26%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What needs improvement with WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus?
It is a basic tool tool, and it does very well for what it is supposed to do. It does simple checks against signatures. I think it is very much what it needs to be, and it is a basic tool that you ...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus?
The solution is used when you want to handle policies with the file. There are different ways you can use it, like in the firewall rules and in proxy rules, and to secure emails. The tool was used ...
What advice do you have for others considering WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus?
It is the basic starting tool. We used different tools in the company. In our gateway, we used WatchGuard because we used WatchGuard's firewalls. It was very easy to set it up. It was used so that ...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Star Cargo
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. WatchGuard Gateway AntiVirus and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.