We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Kaspersky Endpoint Security comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing with a good interface and has excellent customer support. Defender for Endpoint did come out on top in the Ease of Deployment category.
"The most valuable feature is its threat protection and data privacy, including its cyber attack and data protection, as we need to cover and protect data on user devices."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Definitely, the best feature for Cisco Secure Endpoint is the integration with Talos. On the backend, Talos checks all the signatures, all the malware, and for any attacks going on around the world... Because Secure Endpoint has a connection to it, we get protected by it right then and there."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"The integration with other Cisco products seemed to be really effective. We had Umbrella in place and we were using AnyConnect as well as Firepower. Once a threat was detected, being able to do the threat lookups and the live tracking was really useful."
"The most valuable features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business are protection and encryption. Additionally, the interface is good and it can be integrated with Windows, Linux, and Mac."
"It's flexible, and Kaspersky Endpoint Security's performance is good. Also, the pricing is fine."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides total security, everything in one."
"find some of the most valuable features to be the anti-malware, encryption, and the EDR launching service."
"We're more familiar with Kaspersky's interface, and we find it more user-friendly. It also has more features than others, like with BitDefender and Mirco. The price is better, too."
"The solution provides protection for all our systems, file servers, endpoints and domain controllers."
"One of the most valuable features is that it's quite secure. I'm satisfied with this solution."
"It offers very good security protection."
"It depends on the licensing. Most of the customers have got at least a 365 E3 license, and they can use most of the features of Windows 10 Defender. So, anyone who has got an enterprise license can start using those features. Some of the customers have got E5 licenses, and they can use all advanced features. Customers with E5 licenses use the advanced site protection (ATP) features and web content filtering without going via a proxy, which gives the benefit of replacing the proxy. They can get the benefit of MCAS and integration with Intune and the endpoint manager. It is a kind of single platform for all 365 technologies. It helps customers in managing everything through a unified portal."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"It comes included with the Windows license."
"This product is flexible, and it is very easy to get updates from the Microsoft website."
"I like the process visibility. This ability to visualize how something was executed is valuable, and the fact that Defender ATP is also linked to the threat intelligence that they have is also valuable. So, even if you have something that doesn't have a conventional signature, the fact that you get this strange execution means that you can detect things that are normally not visible."
"It performs well. The stability is seamless."
"The threat hunting service is very useful for a security professional."
"Defender should be fine for home use. It has all the basic functionality you need. I can't speak to how well it works as an enterprise solution because I'm not in the space."
"It could be improved in connection with artificial intelligence and IoT."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"An easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"I've had some problems with the web interface. For example, when I was running a trace, it's difficult to find this function, but I can see it when I go on the server. So, if I want to implement the EDR functions on the web interface, it's very difficult because the command button or the link doesn't appear."
"We find that the solution uses up too much RAM and can slow down machines."
"When we connect to the solutions' website they block out our VPN connection. This causes us some difficulties."
"Reaching their support team can be difficult."
"I would like the solution to be able to allow to have end to end security services from the final user to the server."
"When it comes to handling the expiration of licenses, the solution should give a company more time to set up a renewal. It happens too abruptly right now."
"I would like to see integration to many different systems easier."
"The performance level could be better."
"With the XDR dashboard, when you're doing an investigation and you're drilling down to obtain further details it tends to open many different tabs that take you away from your main tabs. You can end up having 10 tabs open for one investigation. This is another area for improvement because you can end up getting lost in the multiple tabs. Therefore, the central console can be improved so that it does not take you to several different pages for each investigation."
"I think Microsoft needs to improve some of the security aspects of Defender. The email part, in particular, needs to be improved in terms of security effectiveness."
"The price, in general, could always be a little bit cheaper."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should have more transparency. In the latest edition of Windows, Windows 11, it is a compulsory requirement to connect to a Microsoft account, which in turn has implications for Defender. This should be removed."
"The initial setup can be a bit complex."
"The UI for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint needs to be better. Integration with client dashboards is also lacking in this product, e.g. client dashboards shouldn't just be viewable from the cloud, because when the client's computer is offline, you won't be able to see the client dashboard."
"I wish they would extend the use of the Security Central portal, even for the free option of Defender. Because, as companies grow, it is labor intensive to manage the AV and detection part of it. For companies already subscribed to Office 365, I think this would be a good enhancement."
"In terms of improvement, they update the platform it seems quite a bit. Every month something is in a new spot or something changed somewhere. There should be less of that."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is ranked 15th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 61 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 121 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business writes "Easy to deploy, run and maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Enables ingestion of events directly into your SIEM/SOAR, but requires integration with all Defender products to work optimally". Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is most compared with Crowdstrike Falcon Endpoint Security and XDR, Sophos Intercept X, Fortinet FortiClient, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Sophos Intercept X, Crowdstrike Falcon Endpoint Security and XDR, Symantec Endpoint Security, SentinelOne and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.