We performed a comparison between Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and ESET Inspect 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."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"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."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The most valuable feature of Datto EDR is the visibility of the endpoints."
"Datto Endpoint Detection and Response is a perfect product for endpoint security."
"The insight that the solution provides is the most valuable aspect. The security scanning they do is excellent."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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."
"The solution could improve by having more deployment methods."
"The deployment of the solution right now is terrible. We find it to be very bad. It could be improved enormously."
"The solution should allow the automation of playbooks."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
More Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 44th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 3 reviews while ESET Inspect is ranked 50th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews. Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.6, while ESET Inspect is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Good security scanning, but has a complex setup and the stability isn't ideal". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ESET Inspect writes "A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities". Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, Huntress and Intercept X Endpoint, whereas ESET Inspect is most compared with HP Wolf Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace and Trend Vision One. See our Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vs. ESET Inspect 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.