Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

360 Safeguard vs MetaDefender comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 14, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

360 Safeguard
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
40th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MetaDefender
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
37th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (37th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (38th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of 360 Safeguard is 1.3%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MetaDefender is 1.4%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MetaDefender1.4%
360 Safeguard1.3%
Other97.3%
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Ahmed Ouda - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Consultant at Connect-Experts
Straightforward to set up and has VPN and load-balancing features, but it could be more scalable, and its web center could be better
There's usually no update for 360 Safeguard. The developer doesn't update it a lot. I have two security solutions. One is 360 Safeguard, and the other is Kaspersky Total Security, where I have a Kaspersky server that controls the network. I'd tell small business owners that 360 Safeguard is okay, but it cannot be suitable for a medium or large business with many users. The solution is good, but it cannot control an extensive network. My rating for 360 Safeguard is seven out of ten. It's eighty percent suitable for small businesses, sixty percent for medium businesses, and it cannot be installed for large businesses. That still depends on your requirements, but it's unsuitable if you have a big business.
Eido Ben Noun - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Architect at Diffiesec
Multi‑engine detection has significantly improved secure file transfers and threat prevention
Some feedback indicated that it takes too much time to configure certain policies because there are many options. Some people appreciate this because you can configure anything, but I believe MetaDefender should have a wizard or general policies that can be used for 80 percent of customers. I use the expanded file type and archive coverage feature sometimes, especially for customers who try to scan large archives with the deep scan capabilities of OPSWAT and Deep CDR. This provides full protection because it scans every single file, but sometimes it takes too long. When discussing CAB files or archives for patching or server updates and BIOS updates and operating system updates, the scanning process takes too long, and it was difficult for customers who sometimes decided not to scan because the scanning time was excessive. I use the reporting and audit visibility features. Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand. If something requires checking and then referring to documentation to understand it, that is too much for most users. When looking at one of the statistics, you can see how many files have been scanned and then you see a number out of 500 or a different number if you change it. It is not a number of files or scan processes; it is a number of files inside a file. When you scan a PowerPoint presentation file, for example, it counts as forty different files because of all the sub-files. I understand from customers that when they look at the visualization data or statistics, they do not understand what is happening there. Most customers I see do not use the file-based vulnerability assessment feature. It has some good results about vulnerabilities, but I am not certain if it is that helpful because many organizations, when they deploy a file and see that there are vulnerabilities, still deploy it because it is part of the code. It can produce results, but those results do not cause any action. Many products have something more advanced than vulnerabilities and static scoring. They have tools that can inform you about a vulnerability, whether the vulnerability is exploitable, if it is weaponized, and if someone can use this vulnerability in your environment. The file-based vulnerability feature works, but for most people, they do not take any action based on the results or block files because of file-based vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I like that it's stable and easy to access."
"The product's initial setup was very straightforward."
"What I found most valuable in 360 Safeguard is its VPN feature. I support remote sites, so I use a VPN."
"I like the simplicity, the way it works out of the box. It's pretty easy to run and configure. The integration of the network devices with the ICAP server was easily done."
"OPSWAT is the best alternative."
 

Cons

"It could be more secure and compatible with other software."
"In 360 Safeguard, there is something called the menu or advanced menu support, a process that I find to be a little bit awkward."
"The web center in 360 Safeguard could be better, so this is its area for improvement. 360 Safeguard could be more scalable, especially for big businesses."
"The documentation is not well written, and I often need to talk with support."
"Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"360 Safeguard is low-priced. It only costs $300."
"I bought a license — it's quite cheap. It's definitely cheaper than an American product. It costs approximately $40 a year."
"We bought a three-year license, and that was pretty expensive. We agreed that it was really worth buying. It could be cheaper, but we understand that quality comes at a price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
OPSWAT MetaDefender, MetaDefender Core
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Anti-Malware Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.