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

Bitdefender MDR vs Field Effect MDR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

Bitdefender MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Field Effect MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Managed Detection and Response (MDR) category, the mindshare of Bitdefender MDR is 3.0%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Field Effect MDR is 3.2%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Jörg Köhler - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient email security and link scanning streamline network protection
One area for improvement is the user-friendliness of the UI. It is not intuitive to manage policies as I have to go through several pages to find necessary information. Additionally, the profile management for scanning and protection profiles is clumsy and could be more straightforward. There should be some simplification in changing profiles due to performance issues.
Rob Schenk - PeerSpot reviewer
The most valuable aspect of the solution is the comprehensive visibility it offers
The most valuable aspect of Field MDR is the comprehensive visibility the solution offers. Most solutions cover the traditional threat landscape for endpoints, including computers, endpoints, servers, etc. However, there are also risk within the network environment, such as WiFi, mobile, the Internet of Things, smart TVs, video surveillance systems, etc., that have associated vulnerabilities. These devices may not be actively managed or protected in most environments. Field Effect MDR gives you visibility across the entire ecosystem. With this broad visibility, you can significantly lower your operational risk. Field Effect has a team of high-quality security analysts reviewing the initial triage to determine whether an alert is actionable. They clear out the false positives and feed our security operation center actionable alerts. It lets us save time because we're only dealing with real issues instead of weeding out the false positives and wasting time. Managing Field Effect is straightforward. We have a good internal process to manage this. It's mainly about having some automation in place to streamline things and having some processes for keeping my software and third-party patching up to date. A lot of security alerts fall in those areas. It helps us identify issues quickly and lower the overall risk for our client rate. It groups alerts by risk levels. The nomenclature is straightforward and easy to understand. Our engineers and technicians are well-versed in the topic.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A user cannot uninstall or disable the tool from their systems. It has ransomware blocking and zero-day threat protection. The tool also alerts us whenever a system or device has been compromised. It has a web control feature to manage website categories."
"If you're looking at an enterprise with centralized control, you can actually push the policies to all your clients' endpoints easily across VPNs."
"The most valuable features include email security and web URL scanning, particularly the link scanning aspect."
"We find it extremely effective. We probably have over 500 endpoints, and we have not had any reports of viruses since we have installed it. It is very reliable."
"It has a very good cloud console that's easy to use and install."
"I like the EDR feature."
"A lot of the AI that is running in the background that deals with the response on different detections is important, and the learning from the labs themselves is also very important. That's where they set themselves apart from others. A lot of the other products that are out there on the market probably have a lot more bells and whistles, but they are not necessarily directed at the heart of what MDR should do, at least in my opinion. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, and in my opinion, if you're getting back to the basics and doing what its true intention is, they've done a very good job in comparison to others."
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten."
"We now have a single cybersecurity product that protects all of our threat services, and all the endpoints."
"I appreciate the "set it and forget it" nature of Field Effect Covalence."
"The most valuable feature is the network traffic monitoring function."
"The feature I've found the move valuable is the 24/7 monitoring."
"I get alerts if there's malicious activity or restrictions, should they any suspicious activity emerge."
"There are user notifications about our cloud solutions and access, meaning authentication and possible breaches. Overall, the notifications and alerts are valuable. There are also new features like the DNS protection, which is quite good."
"I like how comprehensive Field Effect Covalence is."
"The most valuable aspect of Field MDR is the comprehensive visibility the solution offers. Most solutions cover the traditional threat landscape of computers, endpoints, servers, etc. However, there are also things happening within the network environment, such as WiFi, mobile, the Internet of Things, smart TVs, video surveillance systems, etc., that have associated vulnerabilities. Most environments do not manage or protect these assets."
 

Cons

"Bitdefender MDR consumes too many resources during scanning which further affects developers' productivity."
"Bitdefender needs to probably position this product and create more awareness among people because a lot of companies use products like CrowdStrike, which is doing pretty well."
"They're doing a really good job. The throughput and the response time can always be better, but there's already a solution out there. It depends on how much and what tier you want to be a part of. The way they're designed is that if you pay for it, you can have a turnaround time in a very short amount of time. If you don't pay for it, your response time is going to be a little bit less. That can always be improved, no matter what tier you're on. It could be in terms of tech support, or it could also be things like getting the reports and getting the summary back from the labs. When something is detected, what did it all entail? There are a lot of those things. It's not all in one, but all of those are different branches."
"For improvements, focusing on the commercial viability of markets like India could make it more accessible. The pricing structure, especially for price-sensitive markets like those in Asian countries."
"Integration capabilities are not as rich as other tools like CrowdStrike's. Bitdefender wasn't as feature-rich in that aspect."
"They can improve their support a little bit. We've had some issues with some of the installations in terms of getting the installation, configuration, and flows correct, and sometimes, their support is not as simple and easy to deal with as we'd like."
"One area for improvement is the user-friendliness of the UI."
"The automatic backup isn't very big."
"Because this is a security solution, I would recommend that they extend their support hours, and perhaps for emergencies, even to 24/7 or 24/5."
"The area where they can make it better is by giving responses to the end-user. For example, when there is an alert to the administrator, I get it. I have to copy and paste everything to everyone... And then I have to follow up with them, and it's a real pain."
"Field Effect Covalence could benefit from enhancing its packing slip process."
"It would be more effective if it could surgically isolate the specific malicious process instead of deleting the entire machine."
"While the reporting is good, I would like more of a white-label option with my company's name at the top and a clean look for the report."
"The ConnectWise PSA integration is two-way but does not send our comments back to the Field Effect portal."
"While Covalence addresses our notification and visibility needs, it falls short in keeping information up-to-date, which is where our MSP comes in to supplement its functionality."
"In terms of improvement, there are instances where the ARO responses are slightly slower than preferred."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I know it is based on the volume and size and also on different multi-year agreements. There are different discounts applied, but I can't really speak about the specifics."
"Bitdefender fit well for customers with about 50 to 200 users. The price point is great, and you get a lot of bang for your buck."
"It varies based on the number of licenses."
"As far as pricing is concerned, I would rate them not expensive, not cheap."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a four out of ten."
"The pricing is fair and reasonable."
"Field Effect Covalence's pricing is just right."
"It is a little pricey. It is a little on the high end, but we are continuing to use it. We signed the contract and have not canceled, so we find value in having it."
"We're currently enrolled in the volume package, which offers tiered pricing based on usage."
"Although Covalence is expensive, it provides good value for the price."
"The licensing model itself is solid, but we're ironing out some inconsistencies in how customer profiles are configured."
"While the contract duration might change, the pricing remains highly attractive."
"While Field Effect Covalence's pricing seems competitive for the market, the biggest hurdle lies in the lack of dedicated security budgets within many organizations."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions are best for your needs.
863,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Retailer
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
52%
Government
4%
Retailer
4%
Manufacturing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Bitdefender MDR?
The product is on the lower price range compared to competitors. However, there are additional licenses for every add-on, which increases the cost gradually. Despite this, it remains below average ...
What needs improvement with Bitdefender MDR?
One area for improvement is the user-friendliness of the UI. It is not intuitive to manage policies as I have to go through several pages to find necessary information. Additionally, the profile ma...
What do you like most about Field Effect Covalence?
It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Field Effect Covalence?
Pricing was initially a concern, but the recent updates have resolved that by offering a more accessible buying cost.
What needs improvement with Field Effect Covalence?
Some resources lack experience, but issues can be escalated to more knowledgeable contacts. Pricing needed improvement, which was addressed by reducing the buying cost recently. Like any product, s...
 

Also Known As

Bitdefender Managed Detection and Response
Field Effect Covalence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Northstar, SeSa, Greenman-Pederson, TUI Benelux
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender MDR vs. Field Effect MDR and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
863,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.