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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs ESET Inspect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (36th)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

AtulChaurasia - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with intuitive features for detecting malicious files
The initial setup process is straightforward. We have to install the agent, create a package, and deploy it on servers. It has a prebuilt console managed by the cloud team of Cybereason. We don't have to worry about the console and concentrate on endpoint implementation. It takes ten days to deploy it on 10,000 devices.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is efficient."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"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."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
 

Cons

"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"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."
"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."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"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."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The platform's price could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"The pricing is manageable."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use it to improve detection in the whole industrial sector. We are a big energy company. Across multiple endpoints, we deploy the EDR to secure all, improve detection, and also attempt to automa...
What do you like most about ESET Enterprise Inspector?
ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Enterprise Inspector?
The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper. However, it is an essential part of our network's security.
What advice do you have for others considering ESET Enterprise Inspector?
I recommend ESET Enterprise Inspector to others and rate it an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
ESET Enterprise Inspector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. ESET Inspect and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.