We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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 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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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 scalability is good."
"It seems to do a pretty good job of protecting the host. It offers good insights that it gives you when it has a detection. It's pretty incredible."
"Falcon's best feature is its detection and blocking of threats."
"All the features are beneficial."
"I have found the connection to search the hosts for detections very useful in CrowdStrike Falcon."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's scalability is good. We have thousands of students using this solution."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"Overall, what I found most valuable in CrowdStrike Falcon is its good mechanism. It also has a good reporting feature. CrowdStrike Falcon is an invaluable tool because, through it, you can take quick action, for example, when an OS is missing specific patches."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution is not stable."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"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"
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The GUI can use improvement, it's cloud-based so sometimes the interface can be a bit slow. The interface could use a little bit more speed."
"The console is a little cluttered and at times, finding what you're looking for is not intuitive."
"I would like to see the machine learning feature enhanced."
"I would like to see a little bit more in the offline scanning ability. This just comes from my background in what I have done in other positions. They only scan on demand, so I always have this fear that we sometimes maybe email out a dormant virus and can be held liable for that. That is something where I would like to see a little bit more robustness to the tool."
"There are some aspects of the UI that could use some improvement, e.g., working in groups. I build a group, then I have to manually assign prevention policies, update policies, etc., but there is no function to copy that group. So, if I wanted to make a subgroup for troubleshooting or divide workstations into groups of laptops and desktops, then I have to manually build a brand new group. I can't just copy a build from one to another. Additionally, in order to do any work within a group, I have to first do the work on the respective prevention policy page or individual policy page, then remove the group if the group is assigned to a different prevention policy, remove the prevention policy, and then add the new one in. So, it can get a little hectic. It would be easier if I could add and remove things from the group page rather than having to go into the policy pages to do it."
"CrowdStrike needs to quit making up stuff about its features and functionality to bash its competition."
"We have had to open a case with the technical support to get some issues and bugs resolved."
"The portal can be clunky to navigate at times and has room for improvement."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Protect your organization from all threats - not just malware - even when computers and servers aren’t connected to the internet. Start your free trial and deploy CrowdStrike Falcon within minutes to start receiving full threat protection.
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 101 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 42nd in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 19 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.6, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and Trend Vision One, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our CrowdStrike Falcon vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors and best EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) 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.