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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs McAfee Complete Data Protection 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)
McAfee Complete Data Protec...
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Encryption (5th)
 

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.
McAfee Complete Data Protection, on the other hand, focuses on Endpoint Encryption, holds 7.3% mindshare, down 10.0% 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.
ObaseunAwoyinfa - PeerSpot reviewer
Encrypts the hard drive, offers data protection policies and effective part of DLP strategy
The only thing that I think could be improved is the data classifier. It's not a very robust classifier, which is where its limitation lies. For example, you see a lot of higher-end solutions where people can classify data more effectively, adding labels like transcription labels and such. McAfee’s classifier doesn't handle all those tasks. It doesn’t offer the same level of functionality as other data classification tools. You can't do things like fingerprinting and other advanced classification methods. However, if you were to make it more robust, the product could become too heavy to run effectively on endpoints and servers. So, to be honest, I can't think of anything else off the top of my head that could be added. I think it's a great solution as it stands. If anyone wants extended data classification, they can leverage other tools like Titus, Fortra's Classifier Suite (previously known as Boldon James Classifier), or even Microsoft AIP if they have the budget. You can also leverage Trellix to enhance your data protection. From my point of view, McAfee Complete Data Protection is one of the best solutions out there, if not the best, to be honest.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"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."
"The VPN is most valuable. It's the best thing in the market today. We can use two-factor authentication with another platform, and we can authenticate with two-factor."
"With Cisco Secure Endpoint, we now have visibility over what is happening on the endpoint side."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"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."
"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."
"The beauty of McAfee is that they are not looking at encryption from one single standpoint. It is a broader solution."
"It worked for me: it's easy to use and has been very effective."
"I don't need to have any interaction with this product, which means that it is very, very good, and it is doing its job."
"The most important feature of McAfee Complete Data Protection to my customers is the ePO or the management console. It's easy to use and it's scalable. You can also generate the reports you want on the console. It's a mature management console. The features that McAfee Complete Data Protection has, for example, anti-spam features and other features can also be found on other solutions, but the most unique feature you can find in the solution is the ePO itself, the management console."
"With respect to data loss prevention, I think it is helpful to the customer."
"The console of the EDR is totally in the cloud."
"In addition, it is easy to use, and you can define rules that protect the database beyond the built-in rules of the product. I found another purpose for the product besides the basic things that it does, protecting the database: privileged use, weak authentication, SQL injection and and database platform vulnerability."
"The solution is easy to deploy and manage"
 

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 greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"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."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"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."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"One of the things that Cisco Secure Endpoint really needs is that it's not just Secure Endpoint, it's a point product, and I think we really need to move into solution-based selling, designing, and architecting. So that we're not worried about putting things on endpoints and selling 'x' amount of endpoints, but to provide a solution that covers all of the remote access and sell them as solutions that cover multiple things."
"I want simplicity. A new user opening the dashboard will be confused. It needs to be more user-friendly."
"This solution does not do as well at protecting the end-user against unknown viruses."
"There's a limited coverage of operating systems. The marketing strategies need to change drastically."
"The solution needs more advanced features."
"The price is a little high and could be better."
"In terms of where the solution could improve, it could integrate with network solutions for ADTs, email web gateways and discovery."
"The dashboard is not user-friendly"
"We are looking for more granular control over the policies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"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."
"The solution is highly affordable; I believe we pay $2 or $3 per endpoint. It's significantly cheaper than the competitors on the market."
"We had faced some license issues, but it has been improved. At the beginning of the implementation, we faced a lot of licensing issues, but now, we have EA licensing, which gives us an opportunity to grow."
"It is an expensive solution."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"You must make monthly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. There are no extra charges apart from the standard licensing fees associated with the product."
"Pricing is a big issue."
"We currently have a contract option with McAfee Complete Data Protection."
"When it comes to pricing, I've observed an increase recently."
"The solution is affordable"
"The pricing is quite reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The price is good, it's a low-cost solution."
"The solution is more expensive than one of its competitors."
"This solution is reasonably priced."
"The pricing of the cloud offering seems confusing."
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%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

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,...
Would you choose Microsoft BitLocker or McAfee Complete Data Protection?
Microsoft BitLocker is very intuitive and easy to maintain. It is basically the global standard solution for drive encryption and successfully fulfills regulatory needs in terms of data protection....
What do you like most about McAfee Complete Data Protection?
It worked for me: it's easy to use and has been very effective.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Complete Data Protection?
The huge problem I see is pricing. We understand that DLP is not cheap anywhere in the world, but we constantly lose our protection because of pricing. Sometimes, this is because end users prefer t...
 

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
Xcel Energy
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.