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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs Jamf Protect 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

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)
Jamf Protect
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
26th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jamf Protect is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Arunachalam S. - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good monitoring features but needs to improve the support services offered
The tool's drawback is that it fails to offer support for Linux. The XDR and licensing parts of the tool are also areas of concern where improvements are required. XDR is for extensive detection and range of response. Jamf relies on signature-based access. If it is a known signature that just protects our devices, it is a kind of threat isolation. The tool does have behavioral analysis, but as the severity becomes less, the system gets loaded. It is not the same with CrowdStrike as it has a variety of strategies and is a fully cloud-native tool, which helps it to make sure it is a leader in Gartner Magic Quadrant. CrowdStrike goes with its set of practicalities. The kind of threat intelligence CrowdStrike follows is really expensive. With CrowdStrike, we can see which factors have been targeted in our organization. If we know our enemy, then it becomes so easy to cover up with the defense mechanism. The features in CrowdStrike get lagged when used with Jamf Protect. With Jamf Protect, there is a need to improve the security it offers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"Its false positives are very low, because the behavior analysis engine double checks them."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"The product's initial setup phase has very simple steps."
"Jamf Protect's most effective features for threat detection include managing devices and applications, deploying and upgrading the OS, and its overall security features."
"The behavioral detection is valuable."
"We mainly use Jamf Protect to protect staff computers from malware and antivirus."
"The tool's tech support is helpful and efficient. It also has an active community."
"Jamf Protect searches incoming and outgoing traffic for malware to monitor the network for security."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"Jamf Protect is a security product that helps us with CIS benchmarks and threat prevention."
 

Cons

"Some features are too resource intensive."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"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."
"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."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"The dependency on Jamf Pro or SIEM or SOAR for some automations and integrations could be reduced."
"I'd really like to see some data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities. More visibility into user activity on laptops would be helpful."
"Jamf Protect protects just Mac devices, and we would love to have one solution for other platforms and not just Mac devices."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The tool's drawback is that it fails to offer support for Linux."
"Beginners need initial training."
"The solution's integration with other tools is slow."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"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."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Jamf Protect is an expensive solution."
"It's significantly cheaper than other options like ApexOne."
"The product is not an averagely priced tool."
"I rate the product price as a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price."
"Jamf Protect costs double the price that we were paying before."
"The licensing costs are yearly and expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
University
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Jamf Protect?
Jamf Protect searches incoming and outgoing traffic for malware to monitor the network for security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Jamf Protect?
The product is not an averagely priced tool. If the organization is fully on Apple's fleet, they can consider Jamf Protect, but it is quite costly. Jamf Protect is costly compared with any other so...
What needs improvement with Jamf Protect?
The dependency on Jamf Pro or SIEM or SOAR for some automations and integrations could be reduced. In-built automation and remediation of behavior-based threats would be beneficial enhancements.
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Jamf Protect and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.