We performed a comparison between ESET Inspect and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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."We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"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."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"The tool provides automated responses."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"The interface is very good."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"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."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"The interface is not the best."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
ESET Inspect is ranked 51st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. ESET Inspect is rated 7.6, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ESET Inspect writes "A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". ESET Inspect is most compared with HP Wolf Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Darktrace, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our ESET Inspect vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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.
