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

Logpoint vs Sangfor Endpoint Secure 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

Logpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
43rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (39th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (30th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (12th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (18th)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
19th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Logpoint is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Abdullah Secca - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable monitoring and integration features boost compliance
They are not in the US market, and the quality of support has declined. They migrated operations from Boston to Denmark, and we cannot use a tool hosted outside the country. Additionally, dealing with foreign entities for support was a challenge, leading us to switch providers due to lack of adequate support.
Shiraz Ali - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution
I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities. Having a single, more user-friendly management console, like a one-window approach, would streamline the user experience and make it easier for administrators to handle security tasks more efficiently. Sangfor Endpoint Secure currently only allows one manager to control clients, and it lacks a backup system. It would be better if it supported a secondary manager for backup in case the primary one fails, ensuring uninterrupted service.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The UEBA component, as well as the SOAR component, are some of the most valuable features of Logpoint."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"We like the user and entity behaviour analytics (UEBA) and find it valuable."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"The product is easy to use."
"The integration is very user-friendly. There are not many CLI commands. Everything is directly accessible from the web interface."
"In my experience with medium-sized operations, LogPoint's scalability is excellent, so I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"I like the tool's honeypot feature. Some features include having a honeypot to detect attacks in a certain area. Additionally, there is RDP protection, which means that when we remote into our server or any endpoint, we must enter a password as a second layer of security. It can also integrate with next-generation firewalls."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The tool's AI feature is helpful in endpoint security."
"It has a quick response time, threat intelligence, cybersecurity features, quick report generation, behavior analysis, dynamic detection, and quarantine features."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
 

Cons

"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
"LogPoint can improve its dashboards. We are not able to customize the dashboard when creating them. They only have preset dashboards which do not have exactly what we are looking for."
"The documentation part is something that needs to be improved, as well as the threat intelligence investigation part."
"We were missing visuals and graphics. Recently, a new version seems to have come out, and it has a new graphical user interface. When I was integrating it, it was usable, but the GUI needed improvement."
"Nowadays the trend is going towards the ransomware and the endpoint detection and response. So if they added something for that, that will be very, very good."
"The general public wasn't looking for that type of product unless you had a company that was medical or financial and needed 24-hour responsiveness."
"LogPoint must find a way to integrate the servers without agents."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"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."
"The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"When an issue occurs, the response time for first-level support and the time taken for meetings could be improved."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
"My company used to pay for LogPoint costs annually. It's a cost-effective solution. I'm not part of the Finance team, though, so I'm not sure exactly what the licensing fee is or what license my company had."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
"LogPoint seemed like it was a good product, but it was expensive and there wasn't any room to move the pricing when customers needed a lower-costing solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I would rate LogPoint's pricing a seven. It is not very expensive compared to some of the more costly products, and it is not very cheap compared to some of the cheaper products in the SIEM market."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"Our licensing fees are about $10,000 USD per month, which I think is fair."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
"Price-wise, Sangfor Endpoint Secure can be considered a competitively priced product in the market as it offers quite low prices compared to other solutions."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
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
Educational Organization
34%
Computer Software Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
Logpoint needs to be cloud-native, as currently, it is not. Additionally, there should be compliance mapping, where the features and actions within Logpoint map to security compliance standards.
What do you like most about Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates.
What needs improvement with Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered. It would be better if it were a simplified version with fewer buttons and a more consolidated layout.
What is your primary use case for Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure is easy to handle with its user-friendly interface. The four engines it utilizes for endpoint detection provide fewer false positives compared to other solutions. It is used...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Logpoint vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.