We compared Huntress and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection based on our users reviews.
Our conclusion is that Huntress and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection have simple and convenient setup processes. Huntress is known for its expertise in threat-hunting and its 24/7 SOC, while Webroot is praised for its user-friendly interface. Huntress could improve its reporting and integration with other solutions, while Webroot could enhance its reporting system and integrate better with reliable OTXs. Huntress has generally favorable pricing, while Webroot is considered affordable and cost-effective. Customer support for both products has received mixed feedback, with some users finding it responsive and others experiencing issues.
We primarily focused on the topics below:
The summary above is based on 15 interviews we conducted with Huntress and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection users. To access the interviews' full transcripts, download our report.
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The stability is very good."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Foothold detection is a valuable feature, acting as a valuable second set of eyes for both us and our clients."
"It is incredibly efficient for our engineering team because Huntress provides all the information needed to fix issues, not just flag them."
"Huntress helps by highlighting potential issues, allowing us to take proactive measures."
"While threat hunting is undoubtedly the most valuable feature, the combination of IP scanning, foothold identification, and canary monitoring has also proven to be incredibly beneficial."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"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."
"Huntress' best feature is the threat-hunting expertise that is part of their 24/7 SOC."
"I have found it valuable that this solution is always there and always armed."
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"Speed"
"Auto-Remediation"
"The traffic security monitoring, traffic application access feature called the agent, the main feature which is the endpoint security feature are the ones I found valuable. And it also had the in branch security in kind of SD WAN, good three hundred and sixty protection. It is specific and there is ease of deployment also present."
"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Detections could be improved."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution's UI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"Some of Huntress' reporting could be improved."
"We need an API to automatically retrieve metrics and data about backend activity so we can generate client reports."
"One area for improvement in Huntress would be to allow for PSA integration from a specific IP address or hostname for better security measures."
"I'd like Huntress to implement a component that can analyze network traffic for specific sites."
"I would like the API to be a little better. They are getting there."
"The application control system could benefit from improvements in identifying and managing both whitelisted and blacklisted applications."
"In the next release, I'd like to see more intuitive dashboards."
"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."
"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"We need more control over when upgrades to the app are rolled out."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."
"It would be great if there was a feature which would allow you to scan an individual file on an endpoint user's computer."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Huntress is ranked 13th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 12 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Huntress is rated 9.4, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Huntress writes "Is the easiest tool we've ever deployed, is cost-effective, and significantly improved our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Huntress is most compared with SentinelOne Vigilance, Blackpoint Cyber MDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Complete, Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response and Field Effect Covalence, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, HP Wolf Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cynet. See our Huntress vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.