We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Sangfor Endpoint Secure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The solution is overall quite good, the services are performing well. It is very good for those who are using standard PC configurations. It does not block their system up by taking up a lot of resources."
"I consider the heuristics to be most valuable, the fact that the solution does not work solely on signatures."
"The patches on offer are very helpful."
"Ransomware protection is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The most valuable features are ease of use and the GUI."
"It is easy to change the size of its capabilities, i.e. to expand processes or scale the size of users."
"The dashboard is user-friendly."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"We tried to set up Sophos Zero Trust within my Sophos central cloud. It only works with Microsoft and I use Google. I'd like to see Google added."
"Technical support can be improved. There could be shared support, i.e. where someone in Egypt can respond."
"To be a perfect product, the price would have to be a bit better."
"The technical support is the lone sore-point when dealing with this product."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"As for improvement, more notifications or emails about what to watch out for globally would be nice. For instance, information about the spread of a current phishing campaign or ransomware would be very helpful. I find that I have to dig in the back to find out what is happening on the global scene for things to be aware of."
"We are considering switching from this solution as a result of the closer integration needed between the firewall systems and the EDR."
"The solution is expensive, and it could be made cheaper."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is ranked 30th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Sangfor Endpoint Secure is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sangfor Endpoint Secure writes "Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Sangfor Endpoint Secure is most compared with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR and ESET Inspect. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.