We compared Symantec Endpoint Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users' reviews across several parameters.
Symantec Endpoint Security is praised for its robust protection, advanced threat detection, and comprehensive coverage, but users suggest improvements in integration, interface, scanning speed, and resource utilization. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint receives high ratings for its security measures, integration, interface, and customer support, but users note the need for enhancements in system performance, user interface, and threat detection capabilities. Pricing for both products is deemed justified, with positive ROI reported by users.
Features: Symantec Endpoint Security stands out for its advanced threat detection and comprehensive security functionalities. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is valued for its seamless integration with other Microsoft products, efficient threat detection, and user-friendly interface.
Pricing and ROI: Symantec Endpoint Security's setup cost is justified by its strong features, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers competitive pricing with a reasonable setup cost. Symantec's licensing is flexible, while Microsoft's process is user-friendly. Symantec Endpoint Security users praised its positive ROI, citing good value, cyber threat prevention, and time/resource savings. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also delivers strong ROI, with users reporting valuable outcomes.
Room for Improvement: Symantec Endpoint Security has room for improvement in integration with security tools, interface usability, scanning speed, and resource utilization. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could enhance system performance, user interface, threat detection, scanning efficiency, and advanced threat prevention.
Deployment and customer support: Users find that setting up Symantec Endpoint Security takes longer than setting up Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Some users of Microsoft Defender reported varying durations, with some needing three months for deployment and a week for setup, while others required only a week for both. Symantec Endpoint Security offers responsive and efficient customer support, praised for prompt solutions to technical issues. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is highly praised for its knowledgeable support team and effective assistance.
The summary above is based on 208 interviews we conducted recently with Symantec Endpoint Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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."
"Its threat intelligence feature is beneficial. This solution smoothly integrates with SIEM."
"The folders and files protection are its most valuable features. These have been valuable because of the increase in ransomware attacks. With these two features, I can ensure that no changes have been made to our system or endpoint folders and files without the user being aware."
"What I found most valuable in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it's out-of-the-box, which brings more value to the customer. The technical support for the product is also one of the best parts, because it's good, in terms of the product knowledge of the technical engineers."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is extremely stable."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is free and part of the licensing stack of other Microsoft products."
"We have liked the fact that it comes with Microsoft Windows 10 and it is constantly updated with all new virus definitions. It is also updated with new security features on a regular basis."
"Defender for Endpoint is a robust solution that works well out-of-the-box."
"The most important feature is the way it monitors the threats and blocks them. About 10 days ago, we were implementing SOC for a particular client. The SOC was not yet implemented, but they had Microsoft Defender. That organization was hit by some ransomware, but the hacker could not succeed. Because of the EDR, the hacker could not install the hacking tools. They were trying to do that, but Microsoft Defender completely blocked that. The hacker could log into the system, but they could not install anything."
"Symantec ATP provides quite a good overview of how threats have spread within the company."
"The product has been quite stable."
"The feature I find most useful is the console for reporting."
"The solution offers very good security features and is comparable to Sophos."
"I like the firewall and the intrusion prevention features, and just the basic anti-malware and anti-virus seems to be pretty effective as well."
"It's a single-agent installation with many features including wireless protection."
"I like the endpoint detection and response. That's the best feature. I also like the fact that we don't need to use a file on the computer, whereas some anti-malware solutions work with a file on the endpoint. Symantec is a very good option compared to solutions from other vendors."
"The tool has predefined rules, like which actions to block or allow. This makes it easy because I don't have to figure out what policies to deploy."
"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 can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"I would like to see online updates for patches for this solution. I would also like to see online information about what is trending in the market in terms of spams, viruses, or trojans. It takes some time to understand how this solution works. A few things are unclear at the beginning, such as whether it actually restricts the virus or spam at the initial stage, or when there is a security update, how will we come to know and how will it get synchronized. It would be really helpful if there is some kind of knowledge base in the form of video, audio, or document that can explain in a user-friendly way the setup, features, risks, and process to mitigate the risks. Currently, I have installed endpoint security for every individual system. I could not install it like other endpoint solutions where we have a server and a client. It would be really helpful if Microsoft Windows Defender has a server-client based model so that I can save some bandwidth when it downloads or uploads features. It will be helpful if we have a LAN-based or WAN-based controlling system."
"The automation could be simpler on the mitigation side. It has a learning curve. Otherwise, it's pretty easy."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is not as robust, and you cannot customize it much, so that's a challenge."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is secure but when it comes to security all solutions could improve security."
"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 solution could always be more secure."
"The application control feature requires improvement."
"We would like to see more tools for managing on-premises security... Sometimes, we have the tools, like Defender, to manage security in the cloud, but because we are so focused on the cloud, we forget the fact that we need to be sure about the security of the on-premises environment, specifically Active Directory."
"The virus definitions could be updated more frequently."
"In the next release of this solution, I would like to see more to do with malware, encryption technology, and controlling mobile devices."
"Since the acquisition by Broadcom, we are no longer receiving the proper support."
"Overall, the price could be reduced."
"About four years back, Symantec's signature was very heavy and their signature patch was around 200MB or 300MB files."
"I would like to be able to migrate to the cloud so that the end-users outside the company offices don't need a VPN to connect to the Symantec server to update the policies. They should be able to connect to the admin center directly through the internet to get updated policies. There is some integration issue with the other security appliances or tools. Other hardware, firewall, or Network Detection and Response (NDR) solution vendors are not willing to integrate with Symantec. They only mention products from other vendors such as CrowdStrike and Carbon Black. Symantec is not there. Symantec should work on integration with products from other security vendors."
"They're just starting to get into this now, but I think they can do better - they're just starting out with I think is called the SEP Cloud Console. It has more limited functionality. It will be good once we can run SEP from the cloud. That would be good."
"It would be interesting if Symantec Endpoint protection could also manage Windows Defender. If they were to add a feature, it would be nice if you could see the Symantec client and the Windows Defender client in case you choose to deploy both."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Microsoft Intune, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.