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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs ESET Endpoint Encryption comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (12th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (13th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
ESET Endpoint Encryption
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Encryption (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Endpoint Security solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Secure Endpoint is designed for Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) and holds a mindshare of 1.5%, down 1.8% compared to last year.
ESET Endpoint Encryption, on the other hand, focuses on Endpoint Encryption, holds 19.9% mindshare, up 13.3% since last year.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Encryption
 

Featured Reviews

Mark Broughton - PeerSpot reviewer
Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information
We were using a third-party help desk. One of the ways that they were fixing problems was to delete the client and then add the client back if there was an issue where the client had stopped communicating. Any improvement in the client communicating back to the server would be good, particularly for machines that are offline for a couple of weeks. A lot of our guys were working on a rotation where the machine might be offline for that long. They were also terrible about rebooting their machines, so those network connections didn't necessarily get refreshed. So, anything that could improve that communication would be good. Also, an easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful. If you could say, "Okay, we've got these two machines. This one says it's not reporting and this one says it's been reporting. Obviously, somebody did a reinstall," it would help. That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number. Not that Cisco was going to come down on you and say, "Oh, you're using too many licenses," right away. But to have a much more accurate license usage count by being able to better dedupe the records would be good. I also sent over a couple of other ideas to our technical rep. A lot of that had to do with the reporting options. It would be really nice to be able to do a lot more in the reporting. You can't really drill down into the reports that are there. The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint. Also, there was one section when I was playing with the automation where it was asking for the endpoint type rather than the machine name. If I could have just put in the machine name, that would have been great. So there are some opportunities, when it comes to searching, to have more options. If I wanted to search, for example, by a Mac address because, for some reason, I thought there was a duplication and I didn't have the machine name, how could I pull it up with the Mac address? When you're getting to that level, you're really starting to get into the ticky tacky. I would definitely put the reporting and documentation way ahead of that.
Lucky  Lushaba - PeerSpot reviewer
Has an user-friendly UI which even a non-technical person can use
The product should be more responsive regarding feedback if it detects something in our infrastructure. I believe there's a backend that their engineers use to detect viruses in our system. We would appreciate it if they could promptly provide feedback and give us recommendations on how to better protect our infrastructure beyond their system. Additionally, we hope for improved integration with the other systems we currently use. It would be beneficial if they could collaborate to create something that facilitates integration between these systems.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its technical support."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"appreciate the File Trajectory feature, as it's excellent for an analyst or mobile analyst. I can track everything that happens on our server from my PC or device. Integration with SecureX is a welcome feature because it connects Cisco's integrated security portfolio with our complete infrastructure. Sandboxing is helpful, and integration with the Cisco environment is excellent as we use many of their products, and that's very valuable for us."
"If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that."
"The setup is getting easier."
"The most valuable feature is that everything is done on the server."
"The product is easy to implement and configure."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It is very secure and we have finally decided to use this after a thorough check. The interface is easy to navigate."
"The solution's UI is user-friendly. Even a non-technical person can use it."
"ESET Endpoint Encryption works as an antivirus system."
"The most valuable feature of ESET Endpoint Encryption is its rate of capturing viruses and malware."
 

Cons

"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"I would like them to add whatever makes filtering more advanced in scanning and blocking for malware in emails."
"The technical support is very slow."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"My problem is that there's a technical glitch and they don't have a fix for it. It's not working with the latest version of Windows, which is a problem."
"There could be an option for users to restart the system without a password."
"From an admin perspective, the solution's UI could be more user-friendly."
"I would like to see better compatibility with mobile devices."
"I would like more robust reporting as part of the Remote Administrator."
"There should be more frequent updates."
"Integration with central management needs improvement."
"Sometimes the server console is very slow, so the performance could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is very fair to the customer."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"It is quite cost-effective. I would rate it ten out of ten."
"It is a subscription-based product."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"Cisco's pricing is reasonable. We also do not need to opt for niche players, which would have charged us significantly more than Cisco for ecosystem solutions. We are highly satisfied with the pricing structure of Cisco's solutions they are reasonable."
"ESET Endpoint Encryption is moderately priced."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the highest, I rate its pricing a two."
"Licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"The National University System dedicates 500 of their 5000 licenses to us, which is $14/yr per device. Most companies are paying $99 or $120 per device a year."
"It is neither very expensive, nor cheap. Overall it is affordable and there is a long term arrangement between our company and the solution providers for license."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and could be more cost-effective."
"We paid for an annual subscription, and it was reasonable."
"There are some inexpensive products compared to ESET Endpoint Encryption, but they lack the essential features."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Government
8%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco is aggressive in pricing, making it competitive and sometimes even cheaper than other good products like CrowdStrike, Microsoft Defender, or SentinelOne.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco Secure Endpoint lacks features like DLP which other vendors offer. XDR is new, so integration capabilities with third-party tools need improvement. The forensic capabilities need enhancement,...
What needs improvement with ESET Endpoint Encryption?
My problem is that there's a technical glitch and they don't have a fix for it. It's not working with the latest version of Windows, which is a problem. My hands are kind of tied.
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
CCS Media Limited, Mercury Engineering, Unigarant, Pinewood Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, CrowdStrike, SentinelOne and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: April 2025.
850,671 professionals have used our research since 2012.