We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Fidelis Elevate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"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."
"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."
"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's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It is a very stable program."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"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 simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"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."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"It's quite simple, and the advantage I see is that I get the trajectory of what happened inside the network, how a file has been transmitted to the workstation, and which files have got corrupted."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"The technical support is very slow."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"Integration and dashboard are areas with certain shortcomings in Cisco Secure Endpoint."
"Its price is okay for us, but it can always be better. There's always room for improvement when it comes to pricing."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"It is not very stable because we have new versions four times a year, which fixes bugs. We had some problems with some deployments."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 9th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 43 reviews while Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Single dashboard management, quick infrastructure threat detection, and high level support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cisco Umbrella, whereas Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and Darktrace. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fidelis Elevate report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
