We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.
Comparison Results: Kaspersky Endpoint Security comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing with a good interface and has excellent customer support. Defender for Endpoint did come out on top in the Ease of Deployment category.
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"One of the main features of this solution is the fast scanning capabilities."
"The product is fairly technologically advanced and near the top of the market right now."
"The signature update is done securely."
"I have found the security, device, web and application controls to be the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features for us include data security, as well as web browsing and password management security measures."
"Overall, the product is quite flexible."
"The solution is user-friendly and the dashboard is good."
"Our clients are using the advanced options, and they're quite comfortable with this solution because they didn't have any problems. It was easy to integrate it with Active Directory. It is fast and easy to use. It has all the required features."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it is embedded into the Windows system. Additionally, the performance is good and simple to maintain."
"We have very good visibility on our endpoints. The level of information it throws back is helpful."
"The main features of this solution are that it handles everything by itself and is well integrated."
"It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit."
"A few years ago, when I was using a different product, I was affected by a virus that destroyed everything. Since using Microsoft Defender, I have not had this kind of problem."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's most valuable feature is its ease of use."
"It's stable."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"We have zero-day detection of malware but it cannot detect other types of unknown intrusions."
"I'd like to see them improve encryption and remote management in the future. Kaspersky could also improve its scanning technology. Other solutions have adopted machine learning and deep learning, but Kaspersky still uses signature-based scanning."
"There are some features built into Kaspersky that do not work at all, so we have to use other products instead."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"I would like to see better-enhanced features, such as protection against ransomware and different types of malicious malware."
"There are quite a number of areas for improvement. The first area for improvement is that I find this solution to be very resource intensive when you're running a particular task, even a mere scanning task, even though it's running in the background. When you go to inspect the resources you realize it makes the machine very slow. It takes up a lot of resources even though there are no particular scanning tasks scheduled to run. That's one of the issues."
"The application running speed consumes that of RAM, so performance speed is an issue."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"It needs to improve the cybersecurity for lateral movements. For example, when a hacker tries to enter a machine, they try to get the password by doing a lateral movement."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"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."
"Defender is free for one year. Once that year is over, we will switch to Kaspersky."
"I personally haven't experienced any pain points, but some of my coworkers feel that it isn't secure enough."
"The product development team makes frequent changes that affect the stability of the solution."
"The solution could be more friendly for end-users, with different type of scans or scheduled scans for it."
"At times, the other antivirus products are now doing AI, in terms of understanding the behavior of the system and determining when there's an anomaly. This is something that Defender can improve on."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 111 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". 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". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.