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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs MetaDefender comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 14, 2025

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 Anti-Malware Tools
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (36th)
MetaDefender
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
37th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (37th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (38th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.9%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MetaDefender is 1.4%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform0.9%
MetaDefender1.4%
Other97.7%
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Tom Foal - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Klaatu IT Security Ltd
Stops ransomware before it executes and reduces response time for the team
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data storage, backups, and other related areas. It is difficult to think of what they could improve, but low information provided by the system when it detects something is one area, particularly in scripting. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform detects malicious scripts but it needs better measures, perhaps signing scripts, so we can be sure that a script is created by a client, not by some malware. It is really about helping us triage incidents effectively, so a bit more help with the analysis of incidents, particularly what the Deep Instinct Prevention Platform agent has discovered, would be beneficial. We need to know what it has spotted that makes it suspect malware.
Eido Ben Noun - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Architect at Diffiesec
Multi‑engine detection has significantly improved secure file transfers and threat prevention
Some feedback indicated that it takes too much time to configure certain policies because there are many options. Some people appreciate this because you can configure anything, but I believe MetaDefender should have a wizard or general policies that can be used for 80 percent of customers. I use the expanded file type and archive coverage feature sometimes, especially for customers who try to scan large archives with the deep scan capabilities of OPSWAT and Deep CDR. This provides full protection because it scans every single file, but sometimes it takes too long. When discussing CAB files or archives for patching or server updates and BIOS updates and operating system updates, the scanning process takes too long, and it was difficult for customers who sometimes decided not to scan because the scanning time was excessive. I use the reporting and audit visibility features. Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand. If something requires checking and then referring to documentation to understand it, that is too much for most users. When looking at one of the statistics, you can see how many files have been scanned and then you see a number out of 500 or a different number if you change it. It is not a number of files or scan processes; it is a number of files inside a file. When you scan a PowerPoint presentation file, for example, it counts as forty different files because of all the sub-files. I understand from customers that when they look at the visualization data or statistics, they do not understand what is happening there. Most customers I see do not use the file-based vulnerability assessment feature. It has some good results about vulnerabilities, but I am not certain if it is that helpful because many organizations, when they deploy a file and see that there are vulnerabilities, still deploy it because it is part of the code. It can produce results, but those results do not cause any action. Many products have something more advanced than vulnerabilities and static scoring. They have tools that can inform you about a vulnerability, whether the vulnerability is exploitable, if it is weaponized, and if someone can use this vulnerability in your environment. The file-based vulnerability feature works, but for most people, they do not take any action based on the results or block files because of file-based vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"The support is very good. They reply and respond very quickly."
"Deep Instinct Prevention Platform stops all malware, including zero-days in 20 milliseconds, and I have never managed to get anything past it, which means I do not have to get out of bed whenever something happens at the client because we know anything bad has been stopped."
"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."
"Deep Instinct complements the solutions we already have. You don't need to rip and replace any antivirus or endpoint that you have. It's easy to use and it's easy to have it side-by-side with other solutions. That makes it really easy to have an additional level of protection, rather than to hassle with doing solution migration."
"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."
"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."
"OPSWAT is the best alternative."
"I like the simplicity, the way it works out of the box. It's pretty easy to run and configure. The integration of the network devices with the ICAP server was easily done."
 

Cons

"The main area for improvement in Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is Arm support, which is not implemented yet."
"I am looking forward to them adding Linux in Q1 or Q2 of 2019, as this is often requested by my partners and customers. Currently, Deep Instinct only has Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"Deep Instinct Prevention Platform detects malicious scripts but it needs better measures, perhaps signing scripts, so we can be sure that a script is created by a client, not by some malware."
"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 the solution."
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"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."
"The documentation is not well written, and I often need to talk with support."
"Some capabilities are lacking in reporting because we do not have full statistics that are easy for users to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"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."
"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."
"We bought a three-year license, and that was pretty expensive. We agreed that it was really worth buying. It could be cheaper, but we understand that quality comes at a price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
No data available
 

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?
The price for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is reasonable. It is about the same price as any other antivirus.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data storage, backups, and other related areas. It is difficult to think of what they ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
OPSWAT MetaDefender, MetaDefender Core
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Anti-Malware Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.