We performed a comparison between Cynet 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.
Features: Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in file protection, encryption, and ransomware defense. It integrates seamlessly with other Microsoft security products. Users appreciate its user-friendly interface and scalability. Cynet users say the solution should expand device support and add customization options. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools. Users say Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve its central console and auto-recovery feature. They also requested better reporting capabilities and integration with third-party platforms.
Service and Support: Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. They have a dedicated support team that is available round the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents. Microsoft customer service garnered mixed feedback. Some praised the fast response times and expertise of the support engineers, while others were dissatisfied with slow replies and a lack of coordination among the support teams.
Ease of Deployment: Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's setup is straightforward, especially when it’s preloaded on Windows 10. While it can be more complex for larger organizations, it is generally considered simple, particularly for smaller companies or those familiar with Microsoft environments.
Pricing: Customers generally think Cynet is affordable and a good value for its features. Reviewers say Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is fairly priced, noting that it is typically included for free with Windows or Microsoft Office 365 subscriptions. However, some users believe that Microsoft's pricing could be more affordable, and others noted that their licensing models can be complex.
ROI: Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint delivers cost savings, enhanced efficiency, and heightened threat management.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Cynet over Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Cynet offers a tailored experience, regular automatic updates, and a user-friendly dashboard equipped with advanced protection capabilities. Users say Cynet is a comprehensive and cost-effective solution that's priced well for its range of functionalities.
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 is very user-friendly for customers."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"We are using almost all of the features and we find it quite good overall."
"The visibility it gives is excellent."
"The initial setup is very fast and very easy."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the reality graphical user interface."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the network part of it because most of the endpoint products in XDS products we find Cynet has networking user behavior analysis and network analysis, for the whole team."
"Cynet is light and transparent when downloaded. The product's data aggregation is also valuable since you can see everything you need on a page."
"The product has valuable front-end features."
"Cynet is unique in that it has almost everything included and it was built up from the ground, instead of a bundle of purchased and composed modules. It gives you easier very good visibility than Sentinel One as well as a lower maintenance burden."
"We can react to threats faster and stop them from spreading from one machine to another. It protects from suspicious email attachment downloads. It will lock down the SOC and the workstations."
"The solution's main antivirus capabilities are okay. So far, they have kept us safe."
"What I like most is the protection against phishing emails and anti-spam."
"We are a Microsoft shop, and Defender is a Microsoft solution that provides some security at a reasonable cost."
"Ensures that I'm working with a product that gets updated regularly without me having to remember to do it. Since it's a Microsoft product, I'm confident that it requires a low use of system resources. The benefit of that being that my computer isn't constantly being drained."
"In my opinion, the most valuable aspects are the reporting analytics and integration with Sentinel. Defender does an excellent job of correlating the different entities that comprise threat analysis, analytics data, and log analytics. It helps to piece together investigations into any exploit or malicious activity within a specific tenant. AI and analytics tools are probably the most valuable components."
"You have endpoint security to keep your devices safe. That's the feature that we're interested in."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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 is not user-friendly."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Detections could be improved."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"Automation could be improved, and orchestration could be added to the features."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"The reporting is a little weak and could be improved. The other downside is that Cynet does not use the local time zone. It's based off of Greenwich Mean Time."
"One thing to note is that I highly recommend adding a deep learning-based prevention environment as an additional layer to Cynet. However, I always advise my customers to start with Cynet or XDR, for example, and then focus on the people, technology, and processes involved. This is the best approach to ensure that you are not breached with ransomware. While Cynet can prevent most attacks, there have been cases where ransomware has been quicker than Cynet's detection capabilities. In these situations, an additional tool is necessary to ensure complete protection, and that is what I sell as well."
"Its dashboard is not so good. On the dashboard, they don't show the count for client endpoints, which is a failure of this product. This count should be shown on the dashboard. I have 1,000 clients, but I can't see it anywhere on the dashboard."
"Linux servers are not supported."
"Increased application for SOAR abilities across interconnected devices would be a welcome improvement."
"Compliance reports need to improve."
"There are likely some technical improvements or features that could be added, however, I cannot say, off the top of my head, what they would be."
"The price, in general, could always be a little bit cheaper."
"The file scanning has room for improvement. Many people use macros within their files, so there should be a mechanism that helps us to scan them for malicious payloads."
"Integrating this with third-party systems has some complexity involved."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could provide us with a more holistic approach, such as collaboration. They can provide us with an environment from where we can manage all the endpoints from one central location, such as overall management."
"The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security."
"The management console is something that can be improved."
"The scanning is slow when it is working with incoming emails."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cynet is ranked 17th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". 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". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Microsoft Intune. See our Cynet vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
