We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Check Point Harmony has a slight edge in this comparison. According to its reviewers, its interface is friendlier than that of Defender for Endpoint.
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Deploying new versions of the endpoint are easy."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most important characteristic of our requirements was the implementation of disk encryption."
"The platform's most valuable features are the ability to build API, which meets our business requirements, and the VPN client, which provides VPN access from a single client."
"It's a scalable product as it is a cloud offering."
"Its stability during any heavy performance activity is excellent."
"The solution has all the standard features you would expect for endpoint protection."
"The product improved the overall security of our organization with the features like sandboxing and phishing prevention."
"Provides good security features and you can view it in the central console."
"The best part is that it is built into Windows, whether it is a server base or a desktop base, which gives more control over the operating system. Because Defender, the operating system, and the Office solution are by Microsoft, everything is working like hand-in-glove. Its administrative overhead is less because a desktop user has already got some experience of how to handle a Microsoft Defender notification or administer it."
"The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated."
"The primary advantage is that you don't need to install it. It's included in the Windows 10 delivery."
"The detection features are valuable, as is the fact that it is easier to port these logs into Sentinel. That is also useful for us. It is more comprehensive."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are the ease of use and it was available within the operating system."
"The biggest benefit to Windows Defender is that it is built-in to the operating system by Microsoft."
"The solution's threat protection is mostly AI and machine-learning based. That is the most important feature of the product. It also offers centralized management so I can remotely manage devices."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The solutions agent could have better performance, it is a little slow sometimes."
"The application control and URL filtering features are not very strong."
"The solution could improve VPN functionality and the VPN user-interface."
"Sometimes, with a lot of clients (1,000) the UI is a bit sluggish."
"It gives you an alert for malicious sites, which, after searching on the Google database, don't come out to be the same."
"They should also add new functions such as threat hunting."
"Sometimes the portal loads slowly which should be improved."
"We cannot integrate this product with other solutions, which is something that should be improved."
"If they integrate with the EDR then it will benefit this solution."
"The product development team makes frequent changes that affect the stability of the solution."
"Lowering the price would be an improvement."
"Microsoft Defender could be improved with features more like the McAfee ePO. It would be better if I had a console to get all the information for my endpoints. Maybe this is too much for it, but it would be better if it could handle those non-signature-based malicious codes or viruses."
"With increase of cyber threats and cybersecurity issues, I would recommend that the product be developed like an AI product with more features which can counter any threat in the coming eras."
"The central console needs improvement. Both McAfee and Symantec antivirus have dashboards. These integrate with a server and work on my antivirus or some other product. However, with Microsoft Defender, you use Microsoft Group Policy Object. Defender does not provide a central console. Therefore, if you implement Defender, then maybe use another tool for the central view."
"It can get a bit laggy sometimes. Other than that, we don't have any issues. They constantly tweak it and fix it up based on users' feedback. It has improved a lot over the past four years. Defender for Endpoint never really used to be a good endpoint security solution, but over the past couple of years, Microsoft has invested heavily in it. So, it has come a long way in all aspects of endpoint security. If they want to make it better, they should just continue investing in the current path of what they've been doing over the past couple of years."
"Monitoring can always be better, onboarding can be a little bit faster, log collection could be easier, they could streamline the dashboard. They could maybe split it up into different workspaces and have the ability to segment groups a little bit more."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 103 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Tanium. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.