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

Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 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

Kaspersky Endpoint Detectio...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
197
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is 2.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 10.6%, down from 13.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

FarkhundAbbas - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis
Kaspersky's support team is not that much supportive. If we need any help from them, they do not provide a good solution, and it takes too long to resolve the issue. This is the main thing because some cases are easy and need urgent resolution. However, when we create a support ticket, it takes three days to get it planned, and we have urgent requirements. So, the ticketing process needs improvement.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to update with good protection and a useful cloud portal
We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. The malware protection is good. The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively. We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it. It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well. The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning. Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there. While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%. While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions is their ability to detect and respond to spam and viruses in their early stages."
"It is a secure solution with a lot of IT management features."
"The tool's performance and prevention are amazing."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
"The product is integrated with endpoint protection. We don't have to implement a separate technology. It provides visibility over the endpoints."
"Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices."
"We have a concept of working from home. Most endpoints are not in the domain. It is our first line of defense. While we had Kaspersky deployed, it gave good insight into the upcoming challenge or threat."
"A few years ago, when I was using a different product, I was affected by a virus that destroyed everything. Since using Microsoft Defender, I have not had this kind of problem."
"Defender for Endpoint provides good visibility into threats and has favorable threat intelligence."
"It's absolutely free to use."
"The threat hunting service is very useful for a security professional."
"It's not really visible for the user - which is a benefit."
"Attack surface reduction and limiting attack surface vectors are valuable features. It's helpful to isolate specific devices and get super granular with the features they offer."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and the updates are very simple."
 

Cons

"Enhancing user-friendliness should be a priority."
"Kaspersky EDR could be improved by adding network detection capabilities to enhance convenience and security."
"It needs improvement in communication between the network and endpoint, as well as between endpoint and server."
"There is room for improvement in its user interface."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"The main issue was compatibility with the cloud itself. The CPU usage immediately spiked, causing the machines to hang and sometimes even forcing server or computer restarts."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response lacks configuration options."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
"It is not very scalable from the eyes of an MSP because there is no dashboard that you can use to see all of your devices that have Windows Defender unless you have your own dashboard or an RMM tool to actually look at it. So, you might not get to know that a particular computer of a client is doing something, and it might have got a virus. That person might know that, but unless you set it up to actually send you the information, you won't get to know that. That's one of the things that is hard with Microsoft Defender. It is not made for the MSP world where you have one pane of glass to see all of your clients with Microsoft Defender on it unless your RMM tool already has that built-in and it can see the telemetry from Microsoft Defender."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security."
"Phishing and Malware detection could be better."
"With increase of cyber threats and cybersecurity issues, I would recommend that the product be developed like an AI product with more features which can counter any threat in the coming eras."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can use more advertising to promote their features."
"Defender for Endpoint is complex, and the documentation is detailed. At the same time, it's hard to navigate sometimes."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's pricing was high during the last renewal."
"The pricing falls within the average range."
"I would say that their pricing is generally competitive and attractive."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
"The product is cheap."
"I rate the solution's pricing model a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"The cost is competitive and reasonable because most of the expense is log analytics, storage, and data consumption and ingestion. These things can be throttled and controlled, so they are highly flexible. Defender has a lot of advantages over competing products."
"Given our extensive Microsoft licensing, transitioning to Defender for Endpoint did not affect licensing costs."
"You need a license to use this solution."
"Microsoft Defender is an expensive product in my country."
"I don't know the standalone costs. It is my understanding that the M365 E5 is $56 a month or something close to that pricing. That would be for the full suite. Just Defender might be $8 a month. I can't say for sure."
"You do not need to pay any additional costs for antivirus and anti-malware solutions for endpoint protection."
"The license for Microsoft Windows covers Microsoft Defender for Endpoint."
"This solution is part of an enterprise license we have."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Retailer
9%
Educational Organization
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky has a better price than other marketplace solutions. Due to this, they are growing significantly. I like the price. I'd rate it nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Cortex is better in the security features, yet Cortex doesn't have IT management features like Kaspersky. Kaspersky is not an XDR solution. With an XDR solution, we could gain some more time.
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?
We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior solution. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security s...
How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?
The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.