Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Field Effect MDR vs Rapid7 MDR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Field Effect MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
3rd
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rapid7 MDR
Ranking in Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Managed Detection and Response (MDR) category, the mindshare of Field Effect MDR is 2.1%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 MDR is 2.2%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed Detection and Response (MDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Field Effect MDR2.1%
Rapid7 MDR2.2%
Other95.7%
Managed Detection and Response (MDR)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2753850 - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Customer security is enhanced with software and update detection while licensing process needs improvement
A quick specific example of how I use Field Effect MDR to keep my customers secure is that it helps me identify computers that need updates, even when I believe they are already updated. Field Effect MDR finds software and Windows updates that aren't being completed, which I find very valuable.
Ehsan Khaleel - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager SOC at PTCL
Comprehensive detection has strengthened real-time protection and streamlined investigations
My experience with detection and response capabilities for Microsoft-centric environments has been positive. While API integration can be challenging with some third-party tools, Microsoft's built-in features facilitate seamless communication. I have found it relatively easy to triage and integrate Microsoft systems with Rapid7 MDR. In terms of digital forensics and incident response included in the MDR service, my experience is that it is not very robust. We lack a dedicated forensic team, which is essential for thorough investigation. Rapid7 has introduced honeypots, which is an encouraging feature, but it is not a comprehensive solution such as those offered by competitors, such as Palo Alto's Unit 42. Apart from forensics, I believe Rapid7 MDR should introduce more forensic services. Another area to improve is the active platform's handling of on-premises tools versus cloud-based tools. We prefer on-premises options for data security, and we find limitations in features compared to cloud-based tools, concerning data access and privacy controls.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution's advanced detection behaviors, automated notifications and responses, and automated remediation behaviors are valuable features."
"I like how comprehensive Field Effect Covalence is."
"It is easy to manage surveillance."
"The automated response feature is incredibly effective."
"The ARO alerts are helpful to use almost daily to get a sense of what actions we need to take to expedite security measures."
"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."
"We now have a single cybersecurity product that protects all of our threat services, and all the endpoints."
"It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on."
"The features of Rapid7 MDR that I find most effective for threat detection are the threat intelligence capabilities because it already collects many vulnerabilities and exploitations, as well as the configuration of network devices."
"Once we introduced Rapid7 MDR along with their vulnerability assessment tool, IVM, we transitioned from using Qualys and Tenable, which are top-tier tools in the market, because the management tool from Rapid7 allows us to access a variety of vulnerabilities in real time to fix them effectively."
"The product allows us to customize our alerts."
"We've filled in crucial gaps we had with our previous solution. This was a key factor in choosing Rapid7 during the selection process. The ROI is already starting to show, too."
 

Cons

"They put too much detail into the emails."
"Because this is a security solution, I would recommend that they extend their support hours, and perhaps for emergencies, even to 24/7 or 24/5."
"I'd like improved visibility into the backend data where logs are stored, along with integrations with a wider range of products."
"If they can include an email filter system, that would be great."
"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."
"I would like Covalence to include patching."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"Covalence's SEAS feature wasn't very user-friendly."
"The product should provide full transparency in security operations."
"Evaluating the customer service and technical support teams of Rapid7 MDR, I would rate them a six out of ten."
"There are potential improvements in reports and dashboards."
"Rapid7 MDR is currently weak in AI solutions and intelligence, which is concerning."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing model itself is solid, but we're ironing out some inconsistencies in how customer profiles are configured."
"We were particularly impressed with their pricing model, which charges per user rather than per system."
"A top-tier competitor to Field Effect in Magic Quadrant that we had been using until our switch to Field Effect was a great product, but each capability had an additional charge. We had to license modules separately, and each of those add-ons had to be added onto its own consumption and agreement. It was a nightmare from a billing perspective because we had multiple agreements, and each one had a jagged anniversary or a renewal anniversary. It was a nightmare, whereas Field Effect MDR is one product."
"It is on the high end, but it is worth it for the service that you get from them."
"While Field Effect Covalence's pricing seems competitive for the market, the biggest hurdle lies in the lack of dedicated security budgets within many organizations."
"Field Effect is fairly priced from my perspective. You get a lot of bang for the buck with this and a level of visibility that provides you with greater peace of mind knowing that the system is carefully monitored. You also have automated responses for known malicious behavior at any time of the day. Someone could have their Office 365 mailbox compromised at 2 in the morning on a Saturday when most people are asleep or not paying attention, and the system can prevent an issue in an automated way."
"The shift to a per-user pricing model and the introduction of a base price for the on-premises or virtual appliance has been particularly advantageous."
"Covalence is cost-effective."
"The product is not overly priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
39%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Educational Organization
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise3
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Field Effect Covalence?
It is very user-friendly. We have regular reports to see what is going on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Field Effect Covalence?
Pricing was initially a concern, but the recent updates have resolved that by offering a more accessible buying cost.
What needs improvement with Field Effect Covalence?
One way Field Effect MDR can be improved is through its licensing process, which is not ideal. The licensing process is difficult because I have to access a separate website to complete it.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 MDR?
There are areas of Rapid7 MDR that have room for improvement. The market is now changing very quickly towards artificial intelligence, and all the SIEM, EDR, and XDR vendors are moving to apply art...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 MDR?
The typical use case for Rapid7 MDR is that it is highly valued. It is not so bad, but competition with EDR is tough. Rapid7 MDR does not position itself as EDR or XDR, so it is rather a SIEM type ...
 

Also Known As

Field Effect Covalence
Rapid7 Managed Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Landmark Health, NISC, Resimac, Starr Companies
Find out what your peers are saying about Field Effect MDR vs. Rapid7 MDR and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.