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)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (17th)
Jamf Protect
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
30th
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 May 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 0.8%, up from 0.2% 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.
Dinesh Venkates - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective device management, enhance threat detection and smooth integration
I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being easy. Initially, the deployment took 15 days for the pilot phase, and then another 15 days for production. However, the actual deployment itself only took 15 days, as it was preconfigured. So it took around one month in total. Stakeholder approval caused a delay, but the actual deployment for the facility department was only 15 days. No maintenance is required because everything is associated. It's a cloud solution, so we only need to modify applications for the services. So, 99.9% of the time, it's working fine.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
"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."
"Deep Instinct’s prevention-first approach to stopping unknown ransomware and malware is the reason why we purchased the product. The pre-execution versus post-execution is a big piece for us where it is able to stop something before it even hits the box or desktop. That was one of the big reasons why we went with Deep Instinct."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"Deep Instinct's detection rate is close to 100 percent."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward and as simple as CrowdStrike."
"The product's initial setup phase has very simple steps."
"Jamf Protect is a security product that helps us with CIS benchmarks and threat prevention."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"The tool's tech support is helpful and efficient. It also has an active community."
"We mainly use Jamf Protect to protect staff computers from malware and antivirus."
 

Cons

"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."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"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.""
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"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."
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"Beginners need initial training."
"The tool's drawback is that it fails to offer support for Linux."
"The scope of improvement will fall under the support hierarchy that the tool offers to the latest version that Apple derives for any of the latest operating systems to launch."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"The solution's integration with other tools is slow."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Jamf Protect protects just Mac devices, and we would love to have one solution for other platforms and not just Mac devices."
"Jamf Protect needs to improve its pricing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"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."
"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."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"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."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"Jamf Protect is an expensive solution."
"The product is not an averagely priced tool."
"Jamf Protect costs double the price that we were paying before."
"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."
"It's significantly cheaper than other options like ApexOne."
"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.
851,471 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
16%
University
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

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: April 2025.
851,471 professionals have used our research since 2012.