We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"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 is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"There are no issues or drops in the solution's performance...The solution's technical support was helpful."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"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."
"The best feature that we found most valuable, is actually the security product for the endpoint, formerly known as AMP. It has behavioral analytics, so you can be more proactive toward zero-day threats. I found that quite good."
"The most valuable feature at this moment is that Cisco AMP or Cisco Secure Endpoint solution is delivering a lot of things, and I always say to a lot of customers that if we didn't have Cisco AMP, we probably would have had ransomware somewhere. So, it's protecting us very well from a lot of hackers, malware, and especially ransomware."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"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."
"I have found the solution to be very scalable, we have 700 employees using the solution in our organization."
"Symantec End-user Endpoint Security is a very powerful solution."
"The most valuable feature is the automated updating feature."
"The fact that it has centralized management is the most valuable feature."
"It is easy to use. Its interface is user-friendly. So, anybody can use it very well, which is a good thing."
"The feature I find most useful is the console for reporting."
"Some of the features that were important were a built-in firewall and device control."
"There are no issues with scalability."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"The user interface is dull."
"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."
"It is not very stable because we have new versions four times a year, which fixes bugs. We had some problems with some deployments."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"The pricing policy could be more competitive, similar to Cisco's offerings."
"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."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"It should support the next-generation IPS. Currently, it supports only IPS."
"I think the CPU dependence should be enhanced."
"There are limitations because everyone these days has hybrid working; however, the endpoint does not work for us unless we are connected to a VPN, which is a major limitation."
"Nowadays, threats are changing, and they are moving more towards script control and zero-day attacks. So, we would like to have more control similar to an EDR solution. Symantec Endpoint Protection has certainly come a long way as a traditional antivirus, but because the threats are changing, we would like to have more EDR features so that we have a detailed view of the source from where the infection entered the environment and whether it has tried to connect any other endpoint. It should provide such a detailed view for investigation. It should protect against zero-day threats, etc. These are the key enhancements that can make it a complete solution for any enterprise. Currently, we have seen organizations going for two solutions: antivirus and EDR. With both these capabilities, it would be a complete package."
"The monitoring capabilities could be further developed."
"It can be improved in terms of features and integration. It should have more advanced features and more integration. Currently, it is just talking to their own solutions. They could add more artificial intelligence, more XDR, and more integration with other vendors so that we can do sharing of information with other vendors."
"There was an administrative feature, which was available in the previous version, which has been removed. We would like that feature to be added again."
"The platform itself can be improved as there's no way to track how infections get into the organization."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 43 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 138 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint and ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.