We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and WatchGuard Threat 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."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."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"This solution consistently releases improvements. They have communicated their next two years of development which is powerful and covers all of our needs."
"The most useful feature is that we do not need to install or keep signature files. Regular scanning that consumes a lot of computer resources is not needed."
"We are happy with CloudStrike's ease of use and touch notification."
"I like the vulnerability assessment and proactive hunting features of CrowdStrike Falcon."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"I like the Overwatch feature the most."
"CrowdStrike Falcon is a very light solution. It does not use too much processor or RAM."
"The automatic alert feature is the most important feature of the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"The interface is very good."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"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 only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The pricing is a bit too high."
"The Integration with tools, SOC tools, could be better."
"We'd like to see more integration capabilities."
"They should provide us with good visibility for everything."
"The malware analysis could be improved, as that's what we use the solution for the most and that change would make it a better EDR tool."
"The content-filtering features for children could be improved. We have young grandchildren aged 12 and 8. My daughter, their mother, wants to keep them from getting in trouble on the net. She looked at all these other solutions from Google, Microsoft, etc., and she couldn't figure out how to make any of those work. I told her that I bet CrowdStrike could handle this. Sure enough, CrowdStrike can do exactly that. It's the same solution that the Defense Department gets. It works, but it's a little complicated to implement. It could be simpler to set the policies."
"Some of Falcon's features are a bit pricey."
"CrowdStrike should provide better visibility in its reporting. There should be more forensic details about detected threats."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 107 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Vision One, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Huntress. See our CrowdStrike Falcon vs. WatchGuard Threat 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.
