We performed a comparison between Fortinet Forticlient 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: Both solutions have a valuable set of features and are considered to have good pricing. Users seem to give Fortinet Forticlient slightly better ratings because its deployment is easier than that of Microsoft Defender For Endpoint.
"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 firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"It's very stable."
"We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection."
"For our clients with remote sites and deployed firewalls, the filtering and authentication features are very helpful."
"The integration capabilities are good."
"It is a stable solution."
"It has a very easy-to-use interface. It has ease of management, and all the modules are there. SKUs are also easily identifiable. Whatever is required in the firewall is already there in it. It's very advanced, and analytics reporting is very good. They also have cloud reporting. You get all the services that are available for your device in the cloud. You just have to subscribe. It's very easy. There's a lot of demand for this solution because it's an all-in-one solution. The throughput is very high."
"The integration of VPN services with endpoint security is valuable."
"The VPN connection is the feature that I like the most."
"The investigation aspect is the most useful. It's user friendly and has a good user interface."
"I like the real-time protection features. Windows Defender will detect if there's a threat like a Trojan or something like that but Kaspersky lets it run normally."
"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."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"One of the main features is the solution is very light on resources and we do not have any problems with it."
"This product is flexible, and it is very easy to get updates from the Microsoft website."
"The solution's latest features for threat analysis are updated to provide us with future protection against the latest threats worldwide."
"DFE organizational security posture has been a positive experience. We're a Microsoft house. It works. Once it's deployed and once it's configured, it works and our clients tend to be happy with it. I haven't really experienced anyone who has been so unsatisfied with the platform that they wanted to go a couple of different directions, that has never happened to me."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"Detections could be improved."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The tool is expensive."
"The filtering process could be improved."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the connection because sometimes it drops."
"The solution's access control could be improved."
"The software inventory part is not yet up-to-date. It doesn't have a great interface, which is a disadvantage. I wish we could leverage it, but we don't use it at all because it's not that reliable."
"The pricing of the solution should be less expensive."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
"Threat intelligence has the potential for improvement, particularly by integrating more sources."
"The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security."
"The solution could always be more secure."
"Localization is always a challenge, especially with new products you typically want. Solutions are designed to be deployed where the most licenses are being consumed, such as in the United States. They focus on US products, devices, and networks. Specialized deployments for other countries would allow for a smoother experience in transition."
"Integrating this with third-party systems has some complexity involved."
"If the solution could be integrated more with Defender for Cloud, to be more unified, that would help. It is good now, but even more integration could be done with Defender for Cloud. We see two different portals. If Defender for Endpoint could be ported to the CSPM, Defender for Cloud, that would make things even easier for us."
"In the next release, I would like to see better management reporting."
"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."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". 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". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Ivanti Connect Secure and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trellix Endpoint Security and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.
