We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSandbox and Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature was the EDR, endpoint detection and response."
"The main benefit of Fortinet FortiSandbox is that it allows organizations to detect and prevent unknown threats from entering an infrastructure."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the protection and the way it works, the technology is what I like the most."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox's most valuable feature is the security it provides against threats, such as ransomware. Additionally, it integrates well with APIs."
"What I find most valuable, is that it is easy to use."
"The solution is easy to manage."
"Fortinet FortiSandbox is scalable."
"The solution helps identify threats and vulnerabilities."
"The product’s most valuable features are compliance, recommendations, and inventories."
"The product's stability is very high...The scalability of the product is amazing."
"One valuable feature is the Microsoft Security Scorecard."
"The solution is up-to-date and helps prevent zero-day attacks."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiSandbox is complex. You cannot only deploy Fortinet FortiSandbox without deploying the stack of Fortinet solutions. The implementation and integration are challenging tasks with the device and placement in the network. We needed to do POC and offloading testing."
"The licensing can be very confusing. It needs to be simplified."
"Product could include a user interface and be made simpler for customers to configure."
"The delivery feature in my country is extremely bad."
"Something that needs to improve, is the end-point protection."
"Most people are confused about how to use the right integration of the right Fortinet product."
"There could be more templates and a higher number of simulated VMs to configure more use cases. Sometimes we need to configure many use cases in many different environments, and if the number of VMs that we configure is limited, we have to remove some and reconfigure the environment if we need another environment."
"In future releases, I would like to see more automation capabilities."
"The general support could be improved."
"The setup phase of the product is not that easy and needs a person to have a certain level of expertise."
"The technical support takes too much time to resolve tickets."
"Integration can be improved."
"It is challenging to extract and customize reports from the system."
More Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiSandbox is ranked 4th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 36 reviews while Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is ranked 24th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 5 reviews. Fortinet FortiSandbox is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSandbox writes "Light and powerful solution design; useful to have". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management writes "The vulnerability assessment is very accurate because it runs directly into the vulnerability database". Fortinet FortiSandbox is most compared with Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Trellix Network Detection and Response, Check Point SandBlast Network, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 and Fortinet FortiEDR, whereas Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is most compared with Qualys VMDR, Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 InsightVM, Tenable Vulnerability Management and Microsoft Sentinel. See our Fortinet FortiSandbox vs. Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.
