We performed a comparison between ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Microsoft Defender for Identity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution offers impressive advanced protection."
"The performance of the solution is very good it does not impact my hardware and is user-friendly."
"I would say that this solution has the best support team in this kind of Endpoint protection product."
"I have found ESET Endpoint Antivirus is light on system resources compared with other antivirus solutions that tend to be very heavy on the computers system resources. Additionally, the solution is very secure."
"The stability is good."
"The most valuable features of ESET Endpoint Antivirus are the search engine, easy firewall setup, and ransomware scans."
"It's a very user-friendly product."
"I feel the solution to be beneficial in respect of features that I cannot find with SSTM's."
"It automates routine testing and helps automate the finding of high-value alerts."
"Microsoft Defender for Identity provides excellent visibility into threats by leveraging real-time analytics and data intelligence."
"This solution has advanced a lot over the last few years."
"Defender for Identity has not affected the end-user experience."
"All the integration it has with different Microsoft packages, like Teams and Office, is good."
"One of our users had the same password for every personal and company account. That was a problem because she started receiving phishing emails that could compromise all of her accounts. Defender told us that the user was not changing their password."
"The basic security monitoring at its core feature is the most valuable aspect. But also the investigative parts, the historical logging of events over the network are extremely interesting because it gives an in-depth insight into the history of account activity that is really easy to read, easy to follow, and easy to export."
"It is easy to set up. Based on the number of devices you would like to set up, you can use scripts, Group Policy, etc. It takes five minutes to set up."
"They should have better support for different languages and auto-upgrading."
"I would like for ESET to create a central management solution. This would make it practical to use the internet for medium-sized networks."
"I am a MAC user and my asset cybersecurity is continuously displaying warnings that I am not using their firewall."
"The feature is somewhat lacking in security protection."
"I'm not aware of any areas that need improvement."
"The detection could be better in ESET Endpoint Security. Sometimes it takes time to detect threats and might be because it's not holding all the memory. There are some features that have to mature. More features might be available in the higher-end product."
"ESET Endpoint Security should offer more integration with multi-attack frameworks."
"Everything has some kind of room for improvement."
"Microsoft should look at what competing vendors like CrowdStrike and Broadcom are doing and incorporate those features into Sentinel and Defender. At the same time, I think the intelligence inside the product is improving fast. They should incorporate more zero-trust and hybrid trust approaches. They need to build up threat intelligence based on threats and methods used in attacks on other companies."
"We observe a lot of false positives. Sometimes, when we go for a coffee break, we lock our screens. Locking the screen has a separate Windows event ID and sometimes I see it is detected as a failed login."
"An area for improvement is the administrative interface. It's basic compared to other administrative centers. They could make it more user-friendly and easier to navigate."
"I would like to be able to do remediation from the platform because it is just a scanner right now. If you onboard a device, it shows you what is happening, but you can't use it to fix things. You need to go into the system to fix it instead."
"When the data leaves the cloud, there are security issues."
"The solution could be better at using group-managed access and they could replace it with broad-based access controls."
"And when you are working in a priority IP address, Identity is not able to know that those IPs are from the company. It sees that the IPs are from Taiwan or from Hong Kong or from India, even though they are internal IPs, resulting in a lot of false positives."
"The tracking instance needs to be configured appropriately."
More ESET Endpoint Protection Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Identity Pricing and Cost Advice →
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is ranked 5th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 96 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Identity is ranked 6th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 13 reviews. ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender for Identity is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of ESET Endpoint Protection Platform writes "Easy to set up with good security and rapidly improving capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Identity writes "Offers robust protection from insider threats, but the customer support is poor". ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Identity is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID Protection, Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Microsoft Entra Verified ID, Splunk User Behavior Analytics and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our ESET Endpoint Protection Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Identity report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.