We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"I like the simplicity of the portal and the integration with Microsoft Intune. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy to use and implement."
"The best part is that it is built into Windows, whether it is a server base or a desktop base, which gives more control over the operating system. Because Defender, the operating system, and the Office solution are by Microsoft, everything is working like hand-in-glove. Its administrative overhead is less because a desktop user has already got some experience of how to handle a Microsoft Defender notification or administer it."
"The most valuable aspect lies in its automation capabilities, particularly within security automation."
"The antivirus is the most valuable feature."
"The solution provides protections and reports about strange behavior and automatically blocks some of it. I love the way that statuses are represented."
"Because it has been integrated with the OS, we get the entire software inventories, and we even get access to the registries. Those are the primary features."
"The best thing I like about it is its interaction with the other Defender products. It provides the ability to push telemetry up. It gives me endpoint visibility and allows me to take automated actions."
"The solution has good performance, I have not seen a problem."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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"
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The support needs improvement."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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 needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices."
"A single dashboard would be a significant improvement."
"There are likely some technical improvements or features that could be added, however, I cannot say, off the top of my head, what they would be."
"Its interface can be improved a little bit. We would like to have some sort of centralization. It should have something like a central server that is managing all the other clients. There are solutions from Kaspersky or ESET NOD32 that are really doing this kind of thing currently. We would like to see something similar from Microsoft."
"Reporting could be improved. I would like to see how many security incidents occurred in the last six months, how many devices were highly exposed to security risks, and how many devices were actually compromised."
"I would like to see fewer pop messages and alerts."
"The scanning is slow when it is working with incoming emails."
"We would like to see more tools for managing on-premises security... Sometimes, we have the tools, like Defender, to manage security in the cloud, but because we are so focused on the cloud, we forget the fact that we need to be sure about the security of the on-premises environment, specifically Active Directory."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 182 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 7 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Intercept X Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.