We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Check Point Harmony is the winner in this comparison. It is a powerful and flexible solution that is easy to deploy. Kaspersky does come out on top in the pricing category, however.
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Harmony's endpoint sandboxing is really good."
"It's easy to scale as needed."
"Cost-wise it's cheaper than other options."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point Harmony Endpoint is centralized management."
"It is a stable solution. My company has not received any complaints regarding the product's stability from our customers who use the solution."
"The reporting feature where we can see and monitor what happened on our client computers is useful."
"The technical support is good."
"We were under an attack in our environment, and the Check Point response was good because we didn't lose anything."
"Center Management"
"The most valuable feature is the management center."
"We used to have a lot of phishing attacks and all these kind of things for end-users so we decided that we needed endpoint security. We evaluated some solutions and found that Kaspersky is the most appropriate in terms of endpoint security and the speed of the user machine. The encryption is a major factor from our end."
"The policies are easy to make and controlled by the Kaspersky Administrative Security Center, which comes at no additional costs."
"Setting up Kaspersky is easy, but it requires two or three core members from our team, including admins and managers if necessary. And that is because of the administration that I mentioned."
"The user interface is easy to maintain once it is setup."
"One of the most valuable features is that it's quite secure. I'm satisfied with this solution."
"The antivirus feature is very, very good."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"Detections could be improved."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"We need a higher maximum file size in the sandboxing feature."
"I would like to see simple sandboxing for malware analysis."
"Enhanced behavioral analytics would provide a deeper understanding of endpoint activities, fortifying our defenses against sophisticated cyber adversaries."
"Technical support can be a bit slow at times."
"Sometimes the portal loads slowly which should be improved."
"They could be focused on the analysis of USB devices."
"The patch management and upgrades are not timely."
"They should provide bandwidth regulation, so we can monitor and regulate bandwidth."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"The installation is technical. You need to be certified."
"When we connect to the solutions' website they block out our VPN connection. This causes us some difficulties."
"From time to time, some users loose connection via the Network Agent."
"It needs more computer resources. They should have more anti-spam features."
"he next thing that I would like to see in this solution are DLP features."
"We need a more complete Mobile Device Management (MDM) system."
"The solution could be a lot lighter. You really feel it when the laptop starts."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 110 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to setup, stable and good security use cases". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business 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.