We performed a comparison between Elastic Security and Huntress based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"This is stable and scalable."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The most valuable feature for me is Discover."
"It's very customizable, which is quite helpful."
"We chose the product based on the ability to scan for malware using a malware behavioral model as opposed to just a traditional hash-based antivirus. Therefore, it's not as intensive."
"It's very stable and reliable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the prevention methods and the incident alerts."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability. We are in Indonesia, more engineers understand Elastic Security here. So it is easier to scale and also develop. In features, the discovery to query all the logs is very important to us. It is very easy, especially with the query function and the feature to generate alerts and create tools. Sometimes we use the alert security dashboard to monitor our clients."
"Elastic is straightforward, easy to integrate, and highly customizable."
"The solution has a good community surrounding it for lots of helpful documentation for troubleshooting purposes."
"I have found it valuable that this solution is always there and always armed."
"It is very easy to use. It is a great solution. They are one of the better vendors that I have ever worked with since I have been in the industry."
"It catches things that no one else catches. We occasionally have things slip through antivirus and other things, but Huntress catches them. It is awesome as an additional layer of defense on top of other things."
"The EDR product is simple to install. It is low maintenance. All the alerts go to Huntress first, and their analyst team reviews them and sends actionable things our way."
"The most valuable aspect of Huntress is its 24/7 SOC service."
"Huntress' best feature is the threat-hunting expertise that is part of their 24/7 SOC."
"We don’t have the required staff to watch the issues that are happening. It is good to have a team from Huntress who can watch the logs 24/7. The tool’s automatic remediation is also fantastic. The solution’s interface is also nice and easy to use. The Huntress team saves us time by going through the issues."
"It is incredibly efficient for our engineering team because Huntress provides all the information needed to fix issues, not just flag them."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"We're using the open-source edition, for now, I think maybe they can allow their OLED plugin to be open source, as at the moment it is commercialised."
"Authentication is not a default in Kibana. We need to have another tool to have authentication and authorization. These two should be part of Kibana."
"Elastic Security has a steep learning curve, so it takes some time to tune it and set it up for your environment. There are some costs associated with logging things that don't have value. So you need to be cautious to only log things that make sense and keep them around for as long as you need. You shouldn't hold onto things just because you think you might need them."
"It could use maybe a little more on the Linux side."
"This solution cannot do predictive maintenance, so we have to build our own modules for doing it."
"In terms of improvement, there could be more automation in responding to and evaluating detections."
"With Elastic, you have to build the use cases for the specific requirement. Other products have a simple integration and more use cases to integrate out-of-the-box solutions for SIEM."
"Technical support could respond faster."
"One area for improvement in Huntress would be to allow for PSA integration from a specific IP address or hostname for better security measures."
"We need an API to automatically retrieve metrics and data about backend activity so we can generate client reports."
"Huntress' Process Insights feature could benefit from more robust search and filtering capabilities."
"Some of Huntress' reporting could be improved."
"Their EDR can have increased coverage for Macintosh. They do not fully secure Macintosh computers."
"The solution's UI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"The application control system could benefit from improvements in identifying and managing both whitelisted and blacklisted applications."
"The Huntress is not a standalone solution. It really needs to be used with something else such as Microsoft Defender or another antivirus solution. It would be nice to see the product fleshed out by the Huntress team and include the antivirus solution part as well. I want it to be a full-fledged XDR product. It would push the tool to a higher price range but it would be nice to see the fleshed out features. I want them to integrate more features from the XDR realm."
Elastic Security is ranked 16th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 59 reviews while Huntress is ranked 10th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 7.6, while Huntress is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Huntress writes "Is the easiest tool we've ever deployed, is cost-effective, and significantly improved our security posture". Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Huntress is most compared with SentinelOne Vigilance, Blackpoint Cyber MDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Complete, Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response and Bitdefender MDR. See our Elastic Security vs. Huntress report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.