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

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Menlo Secure vs Symantec Endpoint Security 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
CrowdStrike Falcon12.7%
Wazuh10.7%
Darktrace8.3%
Other68.3%
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
Cloud Security Remediation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Menlo Secure0.7%
Wiz Code33.7%
Seemplicity25.2%
Other40.39999999999999%
Cloud Security Remediation
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Symantec Endpoint Security3.7%
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint10.0%
CrowdStrike Falcon8.2%
Other78.1%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Waleed Omar - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides effective real-time threat detection with potential for cost optimization
Some features such as device control, firewall management, and file analysis are standalone products that we need to purchase separately. If these features came out of the box within the product, it would be much more beneficial for us. Other providers such as SentinelOne include these features in their base product. We attended a CrowdStrike Falcon event where they discussed some shallow AI features, but we cannot see these in our panel yet. We work with different solutions such as Darktrace and SocRadar, where AI features are automatically displayed in our dashboards after release. However, for CrowdStrike Falcon, we cannot see these features.
Olivier DALOY - PeerSpot reviewer
Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues
The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.
Kumbesh Rajagopal - PeerSpot reviewer
Management becomes easier with minimal complications, but improvement in support tools needed
Regarding areas of improvement for Symantec Endpoint Security, there are many changes, and the support portal tool is complicated compared to other tools. When trying to get service from Symantec, the process is complex. I'm not sure whether it's because of my project or something else. Though it is easy to manage, easy to get, easy to install, and works efficiently for managing policies, we faced a significant disadvantage. We wanted to add multiple hashes because of numerous new alerts coming, but we could only add them one by one, which is a considerable disadvantage in Symantec.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Among CrowdStrike Falcon's most valuable capabilities are its UEBA and SOAR functionalities, along with its seamless integration with any other SIEM solution."
"The scalability is good."
"We haven't had any infections or down time."
"At this point what is most valuable is the interface, which is easy to navigate."
"This solution consistently releases improvements. They have communicated their next two years of development which is powerful and covers all of our needs."
"The threat intelligence is the most valuable feature."
"CrowdStrike Falcon has a ransom detection time of less than 50 seconds."
"It is an easy product to deploy."
"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."
"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."
"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."
"This security technology addresses risk and enables people to conduct business without that risk, which is where the ROI is realized."
"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."
"Customer service and support are very good, rating ten out of ten."
"Scalability."
"I have found the central control console the most valuable feature."
"The antivirus and antimalware features are good."
"Device control is most valuable. Symantec is providing all such features in the basic plan, whereas when we last checked, such a feature was not available in the basic plan of Malwarebytes."
"The solution can scale."
"There is no other endpoint solution that will help you in preventing lateral-movement attacks on Active Directory. And Active Directory is one of the more critical assets within an organization."
"I like the firewall and the intrusion prevention features, and just the basic anti-malware and anti-virus seems to be pretty effective as well."
 

Cons

"I would like them to improve the correlation of data in the search algorithms. When we run an investigation, malware, phishing, etc., I want to look at multiple endpoints at once to correlate that data to see the likenesses, e.g., how are they not alike or what systems and processes are running across those systems? I don't want to have to run the same search in their Spotlight module five, 10, 15, or 100 times to get 100 different results, copy that data out, and then correlate it on my own. In a very simple way, I want to be able to load up a comma-delimited list giving me the spotlight data on these X amount of hosts, letting me search for it quickly. We have had to go back to CrowdStrike, and say, "Our search are taking far too long for even one host." They did bump up the cores and that did improve performance, but it is still kind of slow to get that Spotlight data. That is probably our biggest pain point. I think that needs some help. I understand this kind of information access is probably not the easiest thing to do. It is probably a big ask depending on how their back-end is setup."
"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."
"The solution could improve the policies themselves. It would be helpful if there were cost-cutting measures."
"The solution isn't known in my market. The brand isn't as recognizable. Their shortcomings are more on the marketing side."
"The technical support could improve because I am in India and the support I receive is from the UK or Australia. It is difficult to manage the time difference. The service could be faster. However, when we do have the support they are knowledgeable."
"The management of the solution could improve."
"We can do a threat analysis of any machine at any time, but that threat analysis is very limited."
"Threat prevention should be their first priority, and false positive reductions are needed."
"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."
"The user monitoring could still be improved."
"Menlo Secure is a smaller company with limited resources and funding, which makes it challenging to compete with larger companies such as Palo and Cisco."
"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."
"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."
"The reporting function needs to be more user friendly in general."
"The Symantec Endpoint Manager is very difficult to use and extremely old."
"Symantec isn't good in terms of updating customers about updates. You'd normally have to search it out. Sometimes, the update process for the administration and management console can be a bit intimidating, and it can be quite inconvenient to get the updates. That's because when you have to do the update, you have to update the management console, and then you need to update the clients. Their application that's installed on desktops and servers needs to go hand in hand with the management console. Sometimes, it's a bit unwieldy to see that process through."
"There is a lack of reporting and alerts."
"When it was directly with Symantec, the technical support was perfect. After Broadcom acquired Symantec, the level of technical support dropped."
"I would like to see fileless attack protection."
"The biggest thing I would like to see is malware remediation, if there is some kind of outbreak. We'd like to see better remediation and better detection and response. It's pretty good at capturing things, but it doesn't stop everything, so better machine learning would be helpful."
"This solution is resource-heavy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As I'm part of the technical team, not the budgeting team, I don't have information on CrowdStrike Falcon pricing."
"CrowdStrike Falcon's price is good."
"We are at about $60,000 per year."
"The pricing and licensing are fairly good. It is definitely not a cheap product, but I have felt that it is worth the money that we spent. So, we have discussed it in the past, and were like, "Yes, it is probably pricier than some other solutions, but we also feel they really are the leader. We are very comfortable with their level of expertise. So, it's kind of worth the price that we pay.""
"Our company pays approximately US$ 65,000 annually for 900 machines."
"When it comes to licensing, customers can choose a bundle or select licences based on the specific features they would like access to. This solution comes with premium pricing. It is approximately 20 to 30% more expensive than competing solutions."
"Crowdstrike Falcon is relatively cheap."
"The price of CrowdStrike Falcon is reasonable."
"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."
"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."
"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."
"Symantec Endpoint Security is a moderately priced solution."
"The pricing is pretty much at the market standard... Symantec is not that cheap and it's not that expensive compared to CrowdStrike. I would put them in the 'middle block.'"
"The prices fluctuate, but this year I think it was maybe around $12,000."
"Licensing is based on a yearly subscription."
"Regarding the licensing, it was important negotiate a long contract to get a more attractive price, including advanced support in case of crisis."
"The pricing is as per the environment. If all the features are there, there will be a cost for them. There were no additional costs for me. Support and other things were included in the pricing."
"The pricing is good, very moderate, and the licensing is also good. It gives you more room to install a lot of endpoints and it even gives you the opportunity to install it on your mobile phone without any extra cost."
"When comparing this solution to others in the current market it is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
866,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise59
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise62
 

Questions from the Community

Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with Darktrace?
Both of these products perform similarly and have many outstanding attributes. CrowdStrike Falcon offers an amazing u...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never pu...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - Cortex XDR or Symantec End-User Endpoint Security?
Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very valu...
Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?
We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior sol...
What do you like most about Symantec End-User Endpoint Security?
Symantec have everything – documentation, videos, data sheets.
 

Also Known As

CrowdStrike Falcon, CrowdStrike Falcon XDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Threat Intelligence, CrowdStrike Identity Protection, CrowdStrike Falcon Surface
Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security
Symantec EPP, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Audio Visual Dynamics, Red Deer Advocate, Asia Pacific Telecom Co. Ltd., Kibbutz Ein Gedi, and AMETEK, Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Microsoft, SentinelOne and others in Extended Detection and Response (XDR). Updated: August 2025.
866,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.