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

Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business vs Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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 TOTAL Security fo...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
50th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Webroot Business Endpoint P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
42nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Cüneyt EZER - PeerSpot reviewer
Good customers support and offers good inventory management
It maintains our security posture I like the inventory management. I also like behavior detection and exploit prevention. It's been good for months but bad on older endpoints. Only performance issues. I have experience with this solution.  I have contacted the support team. They are good…
Rick Cassel - PeerSpot reviewer
Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting
We've had a couple of events both this year and last year where it just didn't seem to catch ransomware, which is impossible to do if someone has hands-on with the system. There were some things that they had or used to have or don't have that I still haven't figured out called journaling. And it was supposed to be a way to roll back changes that were made. However, they're telling me they don't have that. That's not in the system. It’s my understanding that it doesn’t actually scan any files at all. They just look at their database of files they've scanned previously, and either it matches or doesn't. That might be where the shortcoming is, is that it just can't stay up-to-date fast enough to stop new things that are coming in. It's an after-the-fact anti-virus. It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it. There is one thing that is deplorable with the product that I would change as soon as I found a better one. However, the reports are worthless. You go and look at a scan report and cannot get a log of machines. I can log into a console and see the files were scanned every day at 2:00 AM, and they all passed green or something was detected and removed. However, you have to go to the console. I don't have anything that I can send to my client on reports. What they give you is a bunch of bar graphs with no details. You can't drill down. It'll say two infections. However, it doesn't tell you what machines. You've just really got several different reports, and they're all just a bunch of graphs and wasted paper. There's nothing really substantial. The reports that I can use for client-facing, once a month, to say, "Here, we scanned all these workstations. Here are our results," don’t exist. They've got fake reports. I've screamed about that for years, and they just won't do anything. Therefore, I created my own little up-to-date or not ask fail-type report. I send that to them in place of a report directly from a product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the inventory management. I also like behavior detection and exploit prevention."
"Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business provides central management for protection of devices, mitigating attacks effectively."
"Kaspersky offers a large number of robust default policies, such as USB blockage. I really like this feature."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"Low performance requirements."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"The traffic security monitoring, traffic application access feature called the agent, the main feature which is the endpoint security feature are the ones I found valuable. And it also had the in branch security in kind of SD WAN, good three hundred and sixty protection. It is specific and there is ease of deployment also present."
"The main reason we had Webroot is that it was cost-effective for our clients."
"Their policy management, their cloud-based dashboard and user interface are very easy to navigate."
"Probably, compared to other antivirus programs, what we like about it is it is lightweight."
"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."
 

Cons

"It's been good for months but bad on older endpoints. Only performance issues."
"The deployment process could be clarified, specifically around the ability to push the security application to clients from the central servers, as we faced issues with this."
"One significant difference is the lack of on-site support from Kaspersky. Symantec has a local team in Pakistan with representatives I can contact directly for troubleshooting and support. On the other hand, Kaspersky doesn't provide the same level of local resources. If I have an issue, I need to draft an email and send it to a Kaspersky help center."
"We need to know more details about how the virus interacted with the computer."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"The solution could improve by providing better ransomware protection."
"I want Webroot to be easier to use and set up. It is not very intuitive."
"There needs to be more advanced analytics. It would make it a more powerful antivirus solution within the marketplace."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is below average."
"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."
"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."
"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."
"It is relatively cheap."
"From a pricing standpoint, I would rate it a four out of five."
"We evaluate other options using multiple choices, best value, management and functionality."
"Get a trial, then a multi-year license."
"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Real Estate/Law Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business?
Kaspersky offers a large number of robust default policies, such as USB blockage. I really like this feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business?
As a technical engineer, I am not involved in handling pricing and budgeting, which are managed by another department. There have been no extra expenses involved in the standard licensing fee.
What needs improvement with Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business?
The deployment process could be clarified, specifically around the ability to push the security application to clients from the central servers, as we faced issues with this. Additionally, having s...
What do you like most about Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.
What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Mytech Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky TOTAL Security for Business vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.