We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Fortinet FortiEDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"Technical support could be better."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
Digital Guardian is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 11 reviews while Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 13th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 30 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "A proactive solution that works as a proactive upgrade from a firewall". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Digital Guardian vs. Fortinet FortiEDR report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.