We compared Elastic Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Overall, users appreciate both Elastic Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for their comprehensive threat protection, user-friendly interfaces, and effective incident response capabilities. Elastic Security stands out for its strong threat hunting functionalities and log management, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is praised for its efficient system management and reporting. Elastic Security users value its affordability and flexible licensing, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users highlight its reasonable pricing and seamless integration with other Microsoft products. However, Elastic Security users feel it could improve its threat monitoring capabilities and incident response system, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users suggest areas for enhancement such as easier navigation and improved integration with other security tools.
Features: Elastic Security is valued for its strong threat hunting functionalities, efficient log management, and seamless integration with other Elastic solutions. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is praised for its real-time monitoring and detection, efficient system management and reporting, and seamless integration with other Microsoft products.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Elastic Security is regarded positively by users, who appreciate its minimal associated costs and hassle-free experience. On the other hand, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is also praised for its reasonable pricing, straightforward setup process, and flexible licensing options., Elastic Security's positive ROI is attributed to its tangible benefits and delivered results, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's success lies in its performance, effectiveness, ease of use, and real-time insights.
Room for Improvement: Elastic Security product has room for improvement in its threat monitoring capabilities, incident response system, integration with other security tools, navigation, user interface, and customizable features. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has areas that could be enhanced.
Deployment and customer support: The feedback on the duration to establish a new tech solution for Elastic Security varies, with users having different timeframes for deployment, setup, and implementation phases. In contrast, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint also has mixed feedback, with some users spending longer on deployment compared to others who completed both deployment and setup within a week. Looking at the context of the terms used is crucial., Customers have found Elastic Security's customer service to be helpful and supportive, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is praised for its efficiency, promptness, and ability to address concerns.
The summary above is based on 114 interviews we conducted recently with Elastic Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The scalability is good. It can be scaled easily in the production environment."
"We like Elastic Security because it's a REST API-based solution. That's the primary reason we use it."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the prevention methods and the incident alerts."
"It's not very complicated to install Elastic."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Security is that you can install agents, and they are not separately licensed."
"The feature that we have found the most valuable is scalability."
"We chose the product based on the ability to scan for malware using a malware behavioral model as opposed to just a traditional hash-based antivirus. Therefore, it's not as intensive."
"I use the stack every morning to check the errors and it's just so clear. I don't see any disadvantage to using Logstash."
"It's an enterprise solution that provides a centralized console and it supports all the platforms that we use, including Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, and Android."
"We are a Microsoft shop, and Defender is a Microsoft solution that provides some security at a reasonable cost."
"The whole bundle of the product, which is similar to other Microsoft products, is valuable. Ten years ago, you had third-party stuff for different things. You had one solution for email archiving and another third-party one for something else. Nowadays, Microsoft Office covers all the stuff that was formerly covered by third-party solutions. It is the same with antivirus. The functionality is just basic. You have the scanning, and then you also have a kind of cloud-based protection and reporting about your environment. With Microsoft Security Center, you have a complete overview of your environment. You know the software inventory, and you have security recommendations. You can not only see that the antivirus is up to date; you can also see where are the vulnerabilities in your system. Microsoft Security Center tells you where you have old, deprecated software and what kind of CVEs are addressed. It's really cool stuff."
"Ensures that I'm working with a product that gets updated regularly without me having to remember to do it. Since it's a Microsoft product, I'm confident that it requires a low use of system resources. The benefit of that being that my computer isn't constantly being drained."
"One of the valuable features of the solution is the small updates that keep my machine relatively clean from any infections."
"The stability keeps getting better and better."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"Provides good security features and you can view it in the central console."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Detections could be improved."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Elastic Security's maintenance is hard and its scalability is a challenge. There are complications in scaling and upgrading. The solution needs to also provide periodic upgrade checks."
"The biggest challenge has been related to the implementation."
"Its documentation should be a bit better. I have to spend at least a couple of hours to find the solution for a simple thing. When we buy Elastic, training is not included for free with Elastic. We have to pay extra for the training. They should include training in the price."
"The process of designing dashboards is a little cumbersome in Kibana. Unless you are an expert, you will not be able to use it. The process should be pretty straightforward. The authentication feature is what we are looking for. We would love to have a central authentication system in the open-source edition without the need for a license or an enterprise license. If they can give at least a simple authentication system within a company. In a large organization, authentication is very essential for security because logs can contain a lot of confidential data. Therefore, an authentication feature for who accesses it should be there."
"The interface could be more user friendly because it is sometimes hard to deal with."
"Better integration with third-party APMs would be really good."
"We're using the open-source edition, for now, I think maybe they can allow their OLED plugin to be open source, as at the moment it is commercialised."
"This solution cannot do predictive maintenance, so we have to build our own modules for doing it."
"The reporting in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve. The solution has limited features."
"Notifications are always popping up — I hate that."
"There is room to improve the security of the solution."
"Additional security would be beneficial."
"Integration with third-party vendors could be better. It would be better if it integrates with other protection solutions or other products outside of Microsoft. Nowadays, anti-virus protection doesn't really have to be planned as overall protection for your environment in terms of security. There are really different avenues that bad actors can take to wreak havoc on your machine."
"We would like more customization."
"It could be easier when it comes to managing exceptions."
"With regards to the interface, a challenge I found was that there was not enough documentation on how to tune it. I had to read multiple sources on the internet to learn how to configure the tool appropriately."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Elastic Security is ranked 16th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 58 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 182 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 7.6, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Elastic Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.
