We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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."I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"What I have found the most valuable about Sophos Intercept X is the ease of use with management administration and the solution's ability to stop exploits and ransomware."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Intercept X is cloud management."
"I appreciate the ability to use the latest endpoint protection features in case of an infection or cyber threat. This is especially true when using the product with a Sophos firewall solution, like the XG series. They collaborate effectively in the event of a cyber threat."
"The most valuable features are the anti-ransomware engine, deep learning, web filtering, and the cloud manageability."
"The most valuable features of Sophos Intercept X are the minimal configuration needed for the end user and the central view of all the endpoints. There are plenty of tools to control and manage the endpoints. Additionally, there is the capability of connecting the endpoint to the CLI."
"The solution is easy to install."
"The solution protects us."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The interface is very good."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"Technical support is too slow to schedule meetings."
"Installing Sophos Intercept X was not as straightforward, as we had to ask support and had to work with an integrator, though the process didn't take much time, e.g. it was completed within one hour."
"The EDR could be improved, and perhaps the User Interface."
"The cloud management console could be a little more user-friendly."
"Needs more flexible reporting, particularly for medium to large size companies."
"It has a performance hit on a local laptop. There's an agent installed and we are bothered a lot by it because it seems to be using a lot of computer resources."
"In terms of the site-to-site VPN elements, they tend to concentrate. It's quite simple when there are Meraki devices at both ends of the VPN but if there is another user at one end, on another device, it can be a bit tricky. So they could really simplify that process a bit."
"The integration has room for improvement, especially with Mac OS."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"The interface is not the best."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 26th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Trend Vision One, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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.