We performed a comparison between Cynet and Intercept X Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. Cynet needs to expand device support and add customization options. Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures.
Service and Support: Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. Their dedicated support team is available around the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents. Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness.
Ease of Deployment: Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly. Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation.
Pricing: Customers generally think Cynet is affordable and a good value for its features. Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale.
ROI: Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data. Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Cynet over Intercept X Endpoint. Cynet offers a tailored experience, regular automatic updates, and a user-friendly dashboard equipped with advanced protection capabilities. The solution goes the extra mile with its sophisticated ransomware defense and complimentary 24/7 SOC service. While Intercept X Endpoint also offers solid threat protection, Cynet's customization options and comprehensive cybersecurity approach make it the top choice.
"The product is very easy to use."
"The advantage of Microsoft Defender XDR has over other XDRs in the market is that it's easy to use. You can quickly differentiate between alerts, incidents, devices, software, etc. It's easier to investigate an incident, and you have so many options. You can automate investigations and use playbooks. There's also the live response session, which is something you can't find in any other XDR."
"The most valuable feature is probably the aggregation and correlation of the different telemetry points with Defender for Identity, Defender for Endpoint, and Defender for Cloud Apps. All of these various things are part of that portal. We've wanted that single pane of glass for years."
"The unified view of the threat landscape on a central dashboard is the most valuable feature."
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"Setting up Microsoft 365 Defender is easy. It's a user-friendly solution that provides threat protection. It has good stability and scalability."
"I like that it's stable. It's been stable for a long time, and Microsoft Defender has done a good job there."
"Defender is easy to use. It has a nice console, and everything is all in one place."
"It is quite stable. I would rate the stability of the solution a nine out of ten."
"It's transparent, so it's not something where every user has to press a button to download or do the thing. It is centralized, in fact. Personally, I use Malwarebytes and other tools, which are fine for home use. Cynet is also relatively silent in terms of operation, except when it's required to act."
"Cynet is unique in that it has almost everything included and it was built up from the ground, instead of a bundle of purchased and composed modules. It gives you easier very good visibility than Sentinel One as well as a lower maintenance burden."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the network part of it because most of the endpoint products in XDS products we find Cynet has networking user behavior analysis and network analysis, for the whole team."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the reality graphical user interface."
"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 endpoints and network data for a comprehensive view of threats."
"The interface is exceptionally clear and easy to understand."
"The most valuable feature is the monitored support behind it."
"This product integrates well with Sophos firewalls and should be seriously considered by Sophos Firewall clients."
"The most valuable features are the anti-ransomware engine, deep learning, web filtering, and the cloud manageability."
"The most valuable features are the range and restriction."
"It is an intelligent tool."
"This is really good because it's applicable to zero-day threats."
"The solution protects us."
"It is easy to interact with, and its cost is also good."
"It's quite simple to use and user friendly."
"The only issue I've had is, when it comes to deployment, the steps I must take around policy setup. That is challenging."
"In the Microsoft Azure Portal, in Active Directory, if there is anything on the user it will provide you with the information, but you still have to go through it a bit. And sometimes, I have experienced difficulties in understanding the information, especially because the synchronization between Microsoft Intune and the devices that are connected to the user in Azure Active Directory takes a lot of time."
"The web filtering solution needs to be improved because currently, it is very simple."
"I personally have not seen much evidence of how Defender can enhance the story of zero trust for enterprises."
"When discussing the secure score, which includes overviews and recommended actions, some of these recommended actions are not applicable to us, particularly those related to Microsoft Internet Explorer, which we do not use in any of our environments."
"One of the biggest downsides of Microsoft products, in general, is that the menus are often difficult to find, as they tend to move from place to place between versions."
"Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation."
"Microsoft 365 Defender does not have a unique package with emerging endpoint security technologies, such as EDR and XDR."
"Most of their times are in Greenwich Mean Time. I would like to see more local time zones."
"They have some things in the pipeline, we understand, and they're going to be able to support Android and all these other devices soon. The key is the devices - which is an aspect that is lacking right now. Every company has that problem, not just Cynet."
"It is an endpoint agent, but they don't have a probe for checking the network traffic. They could improve from this point of view."
"I think the technical support could be better."
"I cannot provide more details about Cynet's automation features. While Cynet claims to be automated, the specifics of this automation are unclear. They claim to have a high capability to detect and block attacks, but I am cautious about companies that claim to solve every problem without limitations. It does help in identifying malware on the network but doesn't specifically identify vulnerabilities."
"Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices."
"Linux servers are not supported."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"I would like the solution to have more functions and to be more user-friendly."
"The price of this solution can be improved."
"It would be a value-add if they can include integration with other technologies or solutions, like Fortinet, Blue Coat, etc."
"The solution can be expensive, although we do see the value in it."
"The ADR functionalities feel like they aren't mature enough. It hasn't been a long time since Sophos has offered reproduction. Due to the fact that it's so young, it has fewer functionalities than other and more mature ADR solutions."
"The security is good but the feature set is limited."
"I recommend that Intercept X Endpoint should include a patch assessment feature. Various vendors offer virtual patching solutions, which could be a game-changer, especially for the financial sector where frequent service restarts are challenging. These solutions allow patching servers without the need for restarts. Incorporating these features into Intercept X Endpoint would enhance its effectiveness in securing endpoints and servers."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability and updates."
Cynet is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews. Cynet is rated 8.8, while Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Bitdefender GravityZone EDR, whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Cynet vs. Intercept X Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.