We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"This is stable and scalable."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"It has been scalable."
"One feature I like the most is vulnerability management, which shows any vulnerable software or OS present in my environment. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a complete overview and also recommends the steps to mitigate the vulnerabilities or threats. Most of the other antivirus or EDR solutions generally don't provide vulnerability management. It is an add-on that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable."
"The biggest benefit to Windows Defender is that it is built-in to the operating system by Microsoft."
"Endpoint's most valuable feature is deep analysis."
"The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been good."
"The most valuable features are the Windows Firewall and the regular virus definition updates. These features are very helpful and have helped to improve our security."
"The performance of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been a valuable feature."
"It has Kusto Query Language (KQL), so we can use our own queries to find anything."
"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."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"Technical support could be better."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is secure but when it comes to security all solutions could improve security."
"Microsoft Windows Defender doesn't have a game mode."
"We need better support to learn about the product. Documentation is available, but we need some kind of training program so that we can get a better understanding of the product."
"At times, the other antivirus products are now doing AI, in terms of understanding the behavior of the system and determining when there's an anomaly. This is something that Defender can improve on."
"The central management console should be improved because it provides limited options to configure Windows Defender."
"Alerts need to be sent immediately because as it is now, you see some of them without delay and others arrive perhaps 30 minutes later, and it leaves important gaps in terms of information gathering."
"Right now, there's a portal for Azure, portals for Microsoft Office, and portals for endpoints. It would be good to have only one portal and integrate everything."
"The dashboard customization could be improved."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Digital Guardian is ranked 19th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 11 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 2nd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 182 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". 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". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Faronics Deep Freeze, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Digital Guardian vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.