We compared Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform based on users' reviews in six categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: 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. Users were impressed by Deep Instinct’s AI-driven approach and ability to detect and prevent zero-day malware. They also appreciate its proactive defense mechanisms.
Room for Improvement: Users say Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve its central console and auto-recovery feature. Users also requested better reporting capabilities and integration with third-party platforms. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform could improve its documentation, forensic capabilities, and logging system. Users say Deep Instinct’s AI model could be more transparent, and the solution could be better adapted to multi-tenant use cases.
Service and Support: 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. Users praised Deep Instinct's customer service and support for their swift response and overall helpfulness.
Ease of Deployment: 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. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is somewhat complex to set up, requiring multiple steps and some training. The total deployment time may take months.
Pricing: 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. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is cheaper than many competing solutions, and support is included with the basic license.
ROI: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint delivers cost savings, enhanced efficiency, and heightened threat management. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform’s noteworthy benefits include time savings, reduced false positives, and effective prevention against unknown threats.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers sophisticated protection against ransomware, easy deployment, and smooth integration with Microsoft solutions. However, Microsoft’s customer support has received middling reviews, and users would like better compatibility with third-party solutions. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform offers a unique perspective on cybersecurity, with a focus on behavioral analysis and deep learning-based prevention. It also requires enhancements in its interface, administration, and logging system.
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"This is stable and scalable."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"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."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"Deep Instinct's detection rate is close to 100 percent."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"The most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"For threat-hunting, I'll put some threats in a test scenario. I've downloaded known viruses that are out in the public for testing. They're not really a virus but they've got a signature. Defender for Endpoint will automatically find those, quarantine them for me, and alert me to what it did. It gives me "automated eyes.""
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy to load and it runs quietly in the background, unlike other solutions."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's most valuable feature is its ease of use."
"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"Provides good vulnerability assessment."
"I've started to test it from the security point of view. There are plenty of features that are interesting, but at this time, the XDR functionality is most valuable. It is endpoint security on steroids."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The support needs improvement."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"The Management Console is not localized."
"The time it takes to implement policies has room for improvement."
"Features like device inventory continue to lack essential workstation drill-downs showing the entire device information with the least effort."
"It would be nice to have a paid upgrade that would provide additional screening of the day-to-day activities."
"It is inexpensive but could be cheaper like anything else."
"I would like to have additional features such as DNS lookup, which would help for detecting malicious sites."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by making the reporting better."
"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."
"I had some cases a while back and told an agent my issue. When I called the next day, I had to explain everything again to a different person, so I found it annoying to repeat myself all over."
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". 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". Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CylancePROTECT, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Intercept X 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 Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Anti-Malware Tools 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.