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

Cynet vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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

Cynet
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (11th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (3rd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (13th), Threat Deception Platforms (3rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (8th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
40th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cynet is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Zubair Ahmad - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed threat detection efficiently with minimal resource usage
We used the solution as a Managed Detection and Response (MDR) service. It detected threats, and the team managing our services took care of it. We did not face any major challenges or attacks, and memory utilization was minimal. It functioned very well Cynet was valuable since it efficiently…
Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For overall satisfaction, I rate Cynet between nine to ten out of ten, and I wholeheartedly recommend it to other users."
"We are protecting all our workstations."
"The dashboard is beautiful, overall easy of use, and the UBA and NBA features are valued."
"This solution requires less management and is very easy to use."
"The valuable aspects of Cynet are its EDR and XDR components, which are available at a reasonable price point."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the reality graphical user interface."
"As a reseller, I believe the best functions in Cynet's product are the lightweight agent and good detection performance."
"The customer service and support get back to you real quick."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"Deep Instinct was a strategic complement to our Open XDR platform."
"When we were looking at Carbon Black and Sophos, the prevention pieces weren't as strong when compared to DI, which is why we decided to go with DI... I would rather have a product that does the prevention up front and saves me the effort of having to wipe someone's workstation."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
 

Cons

"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the usability of this product for new threats. Meaning, not everything which is new is properly seen by the product and not all the required actions are taken."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"I would like to see more emphasis on building the data lake and storing all endpoint data in the enterprise data lake so that data mining can be performed"
"Cynet is capable and cloud-based, however, enterprise organizations often prefer on-premises servers for managing entire organizations."
"Their support for issues related to the portal or feature problems isn't great."
"Maybe they should add more cloud-to-cloud integrations and also focus on integrations with local, on-premises services."
"A support center in Asia is needed."
"Compliance reports need to improve."
"The Management Console is not localized."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its licensing is on a monthly basis."
"This solution is expensive. I would rate the price as a three out of five when compared to similar products."
"There is an extra cost if you want the support of Cynet."
"Pricing wise, Cynet seems to be very competitive. The cost is probably lower than that offered by many of its competitors for all the functions and features it offers."
"We purchase the product’s yearly license."
"it's not cheap, but I would rate it a three out of ten. If one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"Cynet has a pay-as-you-go pricing model."
"It costs 18,000 per year, but we have the whole package with not only Cynet but also the Perception Point for emails. There are also some small security courses for our users."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"One thing about their licensing program that I like is that just one covers the server as well as on the endpoint as well as mobile devices. There is no complexity in calculating how many SKUs I need for mobile, for laptop, for desktop, and for servers. It's very simple and that makes it much easier to budget."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
5%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

When evaluating User Activity Monitoring, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
The support team that stands behind the detection and response. Is there adequate expertise and are they behind you 24x7x365? Cynet CyOps has been there for us.
What do you like most about Cynet?
In terms of incident response, Cynet can contain attacks, offer a trial period to customers, and uninstall if not continued. The most valuable aspect is its integration capabilities, covering endpo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cynet?
The price of Cynet is reasonable considering its features and support.
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Meuhedet, East Boston Neighborhood Health Center
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cynet vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.