We performed a comparison between Field Effect Covalence and Huntress based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With Binary Defense, we don't just get an alert, but also a detailed rundown of why they're alerting us on it. They tell us what was executed, or the username, script, or IP. That way, we're not wasting time investigating."
"The most valuable feature is reviewing tickets and the notes added by technicians."
"Binary Defense has a human service department that provides live monitoring for our systems."
"The case interface is Binary Defense MDR's most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are the SIEM and the ticketing function; the latter is very smooth and easy to read and understand. We don't have any issues looking at the ticketing information when we're trying to identify what's going on."
"The most valuable part of Binary Defense is its team of cybersecurity analysts. Their analysts filter out the noise and only forward the critical threats that require a response instead of false positives."
"The biggest aspect for us is that they are able to conform to our environment and utilize our tools. That way, we still maintain ownership of all the data and access to the applications, and we never lose control of the ability to run the solution ourselves if we need to."
"Binary Defense's most valuable feature is the 24/7 monitoring and threat hunting. Their team checks the latest breaches and how they're done."
"It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on."
"The most valuable aspect of Field Effect Covalence is its ability to continuously monitor for and identify potential threats."
"It is easy to manage surveillance."
"What I like the most about Field Effect Covalence is the ease of deployment, the fact that it's cost-effective to roll out, and it is reasonable."
"We now have a single cybersecurity product that protects all of our threat services, and all the endpoints."
"The standout feature is its continuous 24/7 monitoring of all network traffic, providing unparalleled vigilance."
"The most valuable feature is the network traffic monitoring function."
"The most valuable features are Action Recommendations of Observations, which keep us informed about existing vulnerabilities so we can proactively update our endpoints and those of our customers against potential threats."
"I have found it valuable that this solution is always there and always armed."
"While threat hunting is undoubtedly the most valuable feature, the combination of IP scanning, foothold identification, and canary monitoring has also proven to be incredibly beneficial."
"It catches things that no one else catches. We occasionally have things slip through antivirus and other things, but Huntress catches them. It is awesome as an additional layer of defense on top of other things."
"We don’t have the required staff to watch the issues that are happening. It is good to have a team from Huntress who can watch the logs 24/7. The tool’s automatic remediation is also fantastic. The solution’s interface is also nice and easy to use. The Huntress team saves us time by going through the issues."
"It is incredibly efficient for our engineering team because Huntress provides all the information needed to fix issues, not just flag them."
"Huntress' best feature is the threat-hunting expertise that is part of their 24/7 SOC."
"Foothold detection is a valuable feature, acting as a valuable second set of eyes for both us and our clients."
"The most valuable aspect of Huntress is its 24/7 SOC service."
"If I were shopping for an MDR solution today, I would not only look for a company that has the ability to alert, detect, and remediate, but also the ability to integrate vulnerability management. That's a big thing that they're lacking today."
"Binary Defense MDR could be even better with additional features, like automatic scans and file quarantine."
"The most significant area for improvement is in support for non-English speakers; we're a global organization, so many of our users are not English speakers, which can make interacting with them a challenge. There's no Chinese language support, so we must rely on what we can do with the internet. We don't expect Binary Defense to build a language staff, but details can get lost in translation when we assume the whole world speaks English."
"I would like to see more frequent check-ins with our security status."
"The only area I see for improvement with Binary Defense is their service portal. It could benefit from some enhancements."
"I don't find any downside to them, but if I have to put one, it would be consistent manpower or staffing. The only area where the solution can be improved is going to be with people. As they grow, they are struggling with the same thing that every other company is, which is getting talent and getting that talent to stay, but they've just revised their tiering system to go from a flat analyst and manager to a three-tier solution where it goes through two or three before it gets elevated. That seems to have worked out well, so if one level misses it, the next one picks it up, and it works out fine."
"The current reporting system could benefit from improvement."
"It's sometimes difficult to know when to engage Binary Defense or TrustedSec, their sister company. TrustedSec is more focused on offensive security, as opposed to the defensive security that the MDR solution provides. It would be awesome if there were a better bridge between that relationship for when we need to get more proactive services or when we need to do a penetration test."
"They could use more third-party integrations with other MSP tools."
"Field Effect Covalence could benefit from enhancing its packing slip process."
"Covalence should provide a live view of the endpoint because the endpoint view in the portal is 5 to 15 minutes behind the actual status of the endpoint and its vulnerabilities. When it doesn't update with the actual status, it makes managing those things harder because sometimes something gets updated, and one of those vulnerabilities has gone away, but that doesn't appear in the ARO."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"The area where they can make it better is by giving responses to the end-user. For example, when there is an alert to the administrator, I get it. I have to copy and paste everything to everyone... And then I have to follow up with them, and it's a real pain."
"It would be more effective if it could surgically isolate the specific malicious process instead of deleting the entire machine."
"One limitation is that if someone takes their laptop outside the office building, the DNS firewall provides minimal coverage, and we are unable to generate reports."
"I would like Covalence to implement patch management as well."
"I would like the API to be a little better. They are getting there."
"Huntress' Process Insights feature could benefit from more robust search and filtering capabilities."
"One area for improvement in Huntress would be to allow for PSA integration from a specific IP address or hostname for better security measures."
"The solution's UI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"In the next release, I'd like to see more intuitive dashboards."
"We need an API to automatically retrieve metrics and data about backend activity so we can generate client reports."
"Some of Huntress' reporting could be improved."
"I am anxiously watching to see how they evolve their MDR for Office 365. If anything, I would like more automated remediation capabilities in their MDR for Office 365."
Field Effect Covalence is ranked 6th in Managed Detection and Response (MDR) with 21 reviews while Huntress is ranked 3rd in Managed Detection and Response (MDR) with 12 reviews. Field Effect Covalence is rated 9.2, while Huntress is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Field Effect Covalence writes "Helps to manage cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and improve our security team's efficiency and security posture ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Huntress writes "Is the easiest tool we've ever deployed, is cost-effective, and significantly improved our security posture". Field Effect Covalence is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon Complete, SentinelOne Vigilance, Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response, Microsoft Defender Experts for Hunting and Blackpoint Cyber MDR, whereas Huntress is most compared with SentinelOne Vigilance, Blackpoint Cyber MDR, CrowdStrike Falcon Complete, Arctic Wolf Managed Detection and Response and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Field Effect Covalence vs. Huntress report.
See our list of best Managed Detection and Response (MDR) vendors.
We monitor all Managed Detection and Response (MDR) 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.
