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

Forescout Platform vs Secureworks Taegis XDR comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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

Forescout Platform
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), IoT Security (3rd), Endpoint Compliance (4th)
Secureworks Taegis XDR
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
35th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Extended Detection and Response (XDR) category, the mindshare of Forescout Platform is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Secureworks Taegis XDR is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
 

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.
BM
It's a complete solution package
When I go into the portal, I can see how many endpoints are enrolled or how many of them are active in place. I can see the current number of threats that are there in the organization. How many threats have been identified, etc. I can see which endpoint the critical events are coming in from a security aspect.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You can quickly filter your view of devices and zero in on the ones you want using a variety of tools, such as what subnet it is on or what it has been classified as."
"Forescout has a feature that blocks the endpoint at the point of collection. It sets preconditions and will block the system if those aren't met."
"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"We use the Forescout Platform for device visibility and control in our network. It's very helpful for tracking malicious or unusual activity. We use it to track which ports are open, which machines are running specific services, and to identify vulnerabilities. For example, there was a vulnerability related to SMB, and we could use the product to determine which machines inside our organization were allowing SMB traffic."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The initial setup is easy, taking no more than two or three weeks."
"Forescout Platform provides multiple features. They have a very effective device fingerprinting in their cloud. You do not need to add any devices manually, such as in Mac devices. Other solutions you have to add IoT devices and OT devices manually. This is one of the major areas that Forescout Platform is excelling in."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"It's a complete solution package."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
 

Cons

"Forescout needs to improve its cloud management and remote connectivity."
"As a user, if I am using a laptop that is Wi-Fi connected, Forescout identifies my port connectivity as one user license, and if I take that same laptop with the same username to a wired network, which is also the same network that is used for the Wi-Fi connection, Forescout detects it as a separate license."
"In the next release of the solution, it could benefit from being more flexible to allow for more freedom."
"I believe that the overall user experience has not always been preferable."
"Forescout Platform would benefit from using AI. Everything has to be set up manually, but AI can learn and suggest rules over time. It also lacks visualization, and some interface configurations need improvement. The visualization seems a couple of years behind compared to other products."
"The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down."
"Forescout Platform isn't flexible with connections to devices like printers and forces you to re-enter details like the MAC address after any breakdowns."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The pricing could be improved."
"We found limitations in the XDR's detections, lacking the ability to create customized detection and log parsing rules."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You can have a flexible license depending on your environment."
"The cost of licensing for this product is quite high, but this cost covers all the features of the solution so it is a single payment for the term that has been selected."
"We went with the virtual appliance option. The biggest cost to running these types of appliances would be to either have multiple virtual appliances at every data center or running Remote SPAN hardware to provide you the real-time network visibility."
"The tool's pricing is expensive but reasonable."
"Forescout's pricing is noted for its attractiveness, with potential discounts depending on partnership levels."
"The ROI is priceless."
"The price of the Forescout Platform is expensive. I purchased it for approximately 94 lakhs."
"They base the license on the number of devices, which is quite misleading."
"The pricing is six out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 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
23%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Performing Arts
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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 Secureworks Taegis XDR?
Initially, we found limitations in the XDR's detections, lacking the ability to create customized detection and log parsing rules. This functionality, available in the Cortex XDR platform, wasn't p...
What is your primary use case for Secureworks Taegis XDR?
More from the perspective of SOC to ensure that every endpoint is taken care of from a cybersecurity perspective. It's a complete solution package.
 

Also Known As

Forescout Platform, CounterACT for Endpoint Compliance, ForeScout CounterACT
Secureworks Taegis NDR
 

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. Secureworks Taegis XDR and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.