We performed a comparison between CylanceOPTICS and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"It is a bit early in our evaluation process to give proper feedback, although so far, the overall feedback is good."
"Cylance is not a signature-based protection solution and instead works proactively using AI and ML models to patrol for malicious behavior."
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. I would give it a close ten as possible because, like SentinelOne, I've seen incompatibility. Whereas Cylance, I've seen none."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to respond to zero-day and unknown threats."
"It's pretty unintrusive"
"The initial setup was fairly straightforward. To get a large health care organization sorted, we had to create exemptions because some of the scripts and some of the automations were broken."
"CylanceOPTICS is easy to use."
"The solution has a high level of trust in the industry."
"The most valuable feature, in my opinion, is the dimension logging platform and the network traffic filtering."
"The tool provides automated responses."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The product's technical support is slow."
"CylanceOPTICS could benefit from more granular control in the timeline-building process. Ideally, users would be able to drill deeper into the analysis rather than have the machine dictate the direction."
"The reporting is very weak and not very good at all."
"Our customers would like to see more automation with respect to how threats are handled once they have been detected."
"The product's initial setup process could be easy."
"One minor issue that somebody mentioned was that they didn't like their management console."
"The technical support could be improved although it's probably better than you get with a lot of the other traditional antivirus solutions"
"The detection component is something that they have to work on."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylanceOPTICS is ranked 32nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 10 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. CylanceOPTICS is rated 7.6, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CylanceOPTICS writes "Enables the isolation and inoculation of infected machines, offering a practical solution for dealing with threats and preventing their spread within the environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". CylanceOPTICS is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Darktrace, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our CylanceOPTICS vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
