We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users praised Symantec Endpoint Security for its regular virus signature updates and comprehensive administrator's console. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures. Reviewers said Symantec Endpoint Security could improve its graphical interface, Linux support, and scanning capabilities.
Service and Support: Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness. Some users said Symantec customer service was helpful but slow, while others have expressed general dissatisfaction with support.
Ease of Deployment: Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation. Some users said Symantec Endpoint Security was easy to set up, while others struggled with the installation. Deployment time varies depending on the customer’s environment.
Pricing: Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale. The cost of Symantec Endpoint Security depends on the licensing terms and necessary security components. While some users find the price acceptable, others believe it could be more affordable.
ROI: Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment. Symantec Endpoint Security demonstrates strong stability and incident prevention, leading to reduced downtime. It offers a favorable return on investment.
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"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."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"One of the best use cases involves synchronized security staff, which allows us to manage both the firewall and the anti-virus features from the cloud."
"The updates and a lot of the day-to-day fiddling that you would have to do with it, can all be done from the cloud so it's easy to manage, and very easy to administer."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"Solution for endpoint detection and response, with good stability and scalability. Users also benefit from email protection and data loss prevention."
"This product integrates well with Sophos firewalls and should be seriously considered by Sophos Firewall clients."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It is quite scalable. You can always add more users. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"The initial setup is simple."
"Can detect and prevent attacks that are exploring common software vulnerabilities."
"One of the most valuable features is the ability to manage antivirus security. There is an admin console that helps you make policies and do deployment of the clients, to make them reachable and to deploy updates."
"Endpoint Protection is the next generation. It covers antivirus, spamware, ransomware..."
"It's customizable, we're able to tune it to work with our products."
"The dashboard view and reporting are valuable. It is stable and easy to integrate, and it provides custom options."
"Its response time is the most valuable. It is very quick."
"The solution's application control feature is very, very powerful."
"Scalability."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Detections could be improved."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"The choices offered for the on-premises and cloud-based platforms are the reverse of each other."
"The solution can be expensive, although we do see the value in it."
"They should work on the logs and events. Sophos Intercept X needs to increase the interface test so that it can export to a live event."
"Through Sophos Central I would like to see the ability to zero in and produce a report about the challenges being faced by a particular machine and user, to know if a virus is appearing only on that specific machine or also on others."
"Stability-wise, we had issues with some clients which had to be dealt with manually. The issue was with that installation part."
"The product defends very well on its own but could possibly use enhancement in giving users more controls."
"The policies could be nicer to manage."
"I would like to see better support for virtual and desktop infrastructures."
"The solution already has support for Windows, Mac, and Linux but it could improve by having better support for Linux. We have run into some problems when there are upgrades. If they can improve this point, Symantec would be good for endpoint protection as well as for a critical server."
"They provide the updates of the client, and those clients need a reboot after the upgrade, which is something we don't like. We don't like to reboot the server after the upgrade because we have live applications. If we do a reboot, it can impact the business as well."
"The platform itself can be improved as there's no way to track how infections get into the organization."
"Automation of tasks should be improved on SEPM. It is currently manual, and we should be able to automate installation and deployment from the client side."
"Difficult to set up on older systems."
"My personal opinion is that Symantec has too many WS.Reputation.1 detections, which could cause important computers to malfunction."
"Since the acquisition by Broadcom, we are no longer receiving the proper support."
"Every time an OS comes out, I have to upgrade the Symantec product. They don't know how to patch it. If they would produce a patch instead of uninstalling or installing over the current version and rebooting I'd be a lot happier with the product."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security 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.
Having used both I'd go with something other than either of these two solutions.
Both deep dive onto your local computers making them impossible to remove, Should the need arise you'll end up having to reimage equipment to fully remove the products. Bloated and they dig their hands into everything on the local machines.
If these are your only two choices, then go with Sophos as it's a MUCH better product.
If you refer to the MITRE Attack analysis, BitDefender is the best, in terms of 100% accuracy and the most number of detections, for the second consecutive year.
@Udhayakumar Murugan,
First, I don't know the budget of yours (which is important) and if you have a budget then you must choose two different vendors to protect you.
And you must have a hardware firewall - it's your first protection layer and you can choose Sophos firewall + Kaspersky endpoint or FortiGate firewall + Sophos endpoint.
My advice to you: FortiGate firewall and Kaspersky endpoint.