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

Forescout Platform vs Microsoft Defender for IoT comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 2025

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

Forescout Platform
Ranking in IoT Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Endpoint Compliance (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th)
Microsoft Defender for IoT
Ranking in IoT Security
5th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Operational Technology (OT) Security (6th), Microsoft Security Suite (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the IoT Security category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 11.6%, down from 16.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for IoT is 11.8%, up from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IoT Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Forescout Platform11.6%
Microsoft Defender for IoT11.8%
Other76.6%
IoT Security
 

Featured Reviews

Odai Halawani - PeerSpot reviewer
It's an easy and effective solution, especially for device profiling without agents
Forescout Platform's most valuable aspect is its excellent device profiling for devices without agents, which is crucial for our work due to challenges with agent-based devices. Its isolation and blocking actions are particularly effective for network security. The device compliance feature helps us ensure device compliance through immediate actions like updating antivirus software. We have already integrated Forescout with antivirus and vulnerability assessment tools, allowing it to monitor vulnerability scores and automatically isolate devices if critical vulnerabilities are detected.
William Tuleja - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration with existing tools boosts management efficiency
The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong. Often, it just links back to a generic KB article without additional information. When it happens, it requires extra detective work. This issue doesn't occur often but can be annoying.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have noticed that in the last year the license model has changed from licensing the whole appliance to licensing the number of devices. It's more simple for a large installation, or a user to have CounterACT as their peripheral site in the company. It's a good choice to have changed the license policy."
"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"The product is very easy to work with and easy to deploy."
"The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices."
"The plugins are very robust -- the ability scanner, patch management system, and SQL integrator."
"The standout strength of this solution lies in its unique capability to effectively manage unmanaged switches."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment, which does not require the use of an agent."
"The best parts of Forescout Platform are its orchestration features, discovery capabilities, classification buckets, and flexibility in creating policies."
"As a cybersecurity consultant, the best part of Microsoft Defender for IoT is the capability to integrate with other tools such as Microsoft Sentinel and receive real-time alerts from the product."
"The graphics and analysis in Microsoft Defender for IoT are very representative."
"Some advantages of Microsoft Defender for IoT are that it's easy to install on any OS, and you can create any custom use cases easily."
"I find Microsoft Defender very effective in vulnerability management and it provides good attack reduction, making it a next-generation protection solution."
"Mainly, it is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"I believe it is best suited for cloud services and is unmatched by other cloud security solutions."
"It is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
 

Cons

"Logging would be one area for improvement. When we're troubleshooting, there are not a lot of clear things on Google that we can look up for ourselves. When we have an issue with it, we have to call the company to get the vendors involved. The logging of Forescout is horrible compared to other things that we've used."
"The console is a fat client, and a web interface would be preferable."
"Regarding pricing, there is room for improvement to enhance competitiveness with other vendors and solutions."
"We have found that the agent-based authentication, available within this solution could be improved."
"They should improve features related to IT security. ForeScout should analyze behavior to see if the behavior is malicious behavior and block this device. They should develop the ability to analyze the behavior of the device in my environment."
"When adding what is in scope to a policy, it would be nice if you could select multiple policies instead of one policy at a time to add what is in the scope for network segmentation. I have found that during the install and configuration of the policies that if you want to modify multiple policies or enable multiple policies that you need to define what is in the scope (IP range or segments) one rule at a time. This caused some slow downs when implementing policies."
"More detailed analysis during the authentication process, especially for troubleshooting access issues. We have found that troubleshooting RADIUS controls is quite arduous, as it is today. A trace function could easily resolve this by providing a means by which access issues from a certificate to passwords or accounts could easily be identified and remediated."
"For improvements, I think technical support could be enhanced. The time zone difference makes remote support difficult - I'm in Indonesia, and they're in the US. Maybe the Forescout Platform could provide engineers from Asia Pacific."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
"There are a few limitations with Microsoft Defender for IoT. We raised concerns with the product team because they don't capture all the information regarding command execution or processes executed on certain endpoints."
"The documentation for Microsoft Defender for IoT is lacking. There are no clear steps or guidance, and updates are frequent, which adds to the confusion."
"Microsoft Defender for IoT is not scalable. If you want to monitor another industrial network, you need an additional server, making it less scalable."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
"Customer service and support from Microsoft are costly. The execution by engineers is expensive, and the service is neither free nor toll-free, making it less accessible for customers."
"The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the Forescout Platform is expensive. I purchased it for approximately 94 lakhs."
"The fact that we were allowed to spin up as many servers as we had need of to support our geographic requirements while paying for licensing as an enterprise truly set Forescout apart from the crowd and improved the way we could design our access."
"It's about $160,000, but I'm not sure how long that is for or what it includes. Because we were a test base, we were provided with servers, but now, Forescout wants us to buy servers because those servers are now end-of-life or end-of-service. For our lifecycle management program, in order to get a refresh on those servers, we would have to buy servers or use our own network resources to house Forescout. Forescout takes up about 13 or 14 virtual CPUs."
"I would rate Forescout Platform's pricing as four out of five."
"We paid between $20,000 and $25,000 for a three-year license with maintenance."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. We have paid for the license for five years. We have integration with Symantec AV for orchestration, and we have an additional license."
"The tool's pricing is expensive but reasonable."
"The price of Forescout is reasonable when compared to Cisco ISE."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IoT Security solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise43
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
Forescout is a very powerful NAC product that does not rely on port level configuration. It can detect and block unauthorized devices very quickly. But it has a lot of capabilities and really would...
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I would rate the Forescout Device and Visibility Control Platform at a six out of ten.
What advice do you have for others considering Forescout Platform?
I recommend doing a compression demo. If people use it, they will buy it. So they have to see the product in place. That's the main recommendation is to do a proof of concept. If they do, they will...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for IoT?
I don't think I have any recommendation on improvements for Microsoft Defender for IoT because we don't use it too extensively. There are a few limitations with Microsoft Defender for IoT. We raise...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
Clients mainly use Microsoft Defender for IoT for unfamiliar sign-in attempts and Microsoft Defender EDRs. We are using use cases for unfamiliar sign-in and malicious activity, such as user sign-in...
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
Azure Defender for IoT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS Sussex, SAP, SEGA, Vistaprint, Miami Children's Hospital, Pioneer Investments, New York Law School, OmnicomGroup, Meritrust
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Forescout Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for IoT and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.