We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response 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."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The main advantage of the solution is the ability to implement complete security policies for the terminals in order to address how apps are installed on corporate devices."
"It is minimally invasive. From a single installer, the equipment is protected and secured."
"The most valuable features of the solution are web protection and threat prevention."
"Check Point Endpoint Security really helped the business stop various malware attacks throughout the time we used it, including a ransomware attack, which was stopped in minutes."
"The biggest value we found was ease of deployment. I haven't really used it much, so I can't really comment beyond that. I haven't used it much, but it's working."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the VPN."
"The end-user facilities for managing the tool are good."
"The most valuable feature is forensics."
"The interface is quite easy to use."
"It is mostly used for malware detection and antivirus purposes."
"The most valuable feature is that the same agent can act as the endpoint detection and response agent."
"The Detection vulnerability is very effective."
"The solution can scale well."
"I have had absolutely no problem with using this solution, it really works well."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is stable."
"It is very simple to use."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I would like to see support for a policy in the appliance that will refuse to create a connection if it does not detect an active virus scanner."
"The solution needs more alerts to warn of attacks."
"It would be useful if you could also mark blocks as safe from a client. Now users always have to ask an admin to make exclusions."
"We need a higher maximum file size in the sandboxing feature."
"It gives you an alert for malicious sites, which, after searching on the Google database, don't come out to be the same."
"If you're using an endpoint that does not have sufficient resources, it would be very tough to use."
"The solution has limitations if it's hosted on-prem or as a SaaS."
"There are a number of features behind paywalls which can be frustrating when you are already paying a premium."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response could improve the reporting. It is very difficult to create reports from the user interface."
"The Symantec portfolio is not big enough to cover the organization in all 360 degrees."
"One potential area for improvement in Symantec EDR is the reporting engine."
"The solution’s scalability and stability could be improved."
"They do need to minimize the number of agents installed on a server."
"It would be beneficial to have more integration and compatibility with other platforms."
"Its UI could be more user-friendly."
"It would be good if it can anticipate zero-day attacks. I don't know how it can be done and if it is even a feature of this product."
More Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 104 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 28 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response writes "A highly stable and affordable solution for detecting and preventing security threats". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response 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.