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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Microsoft Defender for IoT comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
210
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (2nd), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (3rd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (2nd)
Microsoft Defender for IoT
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
26th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
IoT Security (5th), Operational Technology (OT) Security (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 7.9%, down from 8.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for IoT is 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint7.9%
Microsoft Defender for IoT0.8%
Other91.3%
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Robert Arbuckle - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Analyst III at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Automatically isolates threats and integrates with logging to reduce response time
Overall, I would evaluate the Microsoft support level that I receive at probably about a seven, but that depends on the day. It has been spotty. We have had issues where the urgency level of the Microsoft support is not as high as ours, especially during a data breach or potential data breach situation. We have had issues with some of the offshore support being lackluster. One specific thing that comes to mind is we were on a support call with our CISO on the call, and the Microsoft agent, who did not actually work for Microsoft, is one of the vendors that Microsoft uses for support, said, "Just to set expectations, my lunch break is in an hour and I am going to go away then." For us, it was already ten o'clock at night and we had been working on this for a couple of hours, trying to get a security engineer on with us. For him to tell us that he was going to go away and have lunch, it was, "Okay, but go find somebody else if you need to." It was just the lackluster approach, and it seemed like he did not really care. We seem to get a lot of this when we get non-Microsoft support. I can identify areas for improvement with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, as it is kind of a convoluted mess to try to take care of false positives. Especially when they have been identified as false positives but they keep going off over and over again. It is great for my pocketbook because it generates a lot of on-call action, but I would really prefer more sleep at two o'clock in the morning than dealing with false positives. I would say that the unified portal for managing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is suitable for both teams as they are all in there. It would be great if they would stop moving things around and renaming things, which makes sense. The new XDR portal is pretty nice. Being able to have it central again inside of the regular Security Center without having to open up two windows is helpful. Overall, I think it is pretty good. There is always going to be something that could be improved, such as alerting and the ability to modify alerts would be a little bit helpful to have. Being able to add more data into the alerts and turn off alerts that are not as useful would be beneficial. It is hard to say what the quantitative impact the security exposure management feature has had on our company's security, because a lot of it is kind of subjective. I think we are sitting at around a fifty percent score still, and a lot of it is just kind of unusual circumstances that we cannot really implement without breaking the organization.
AA
Principale Systems Architect at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Effective network monitoring with identified documentation improvements needed
The documentation for Microsoft Defender for IoT is lacking. There are no clear steps or guidance, and updates are frequent, which adds to the confusion. More detailed documentation with video instructions for tasks would be helpful. The system capabilities are not well-documented either. Importing device names and maintaining a list can be cumbersome, as it requires manual input for a large number of devices. The backup and restore process is limited to GUI for backup but lacks a GUI for restore, though future updates might address this. Sentinel documentation is also poor, with limited guidance available.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It automatically detects intrusion and malware."
"The EDR feature is most valuable."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has changed significantly for the better."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite good. We haven't really experienced any issues with it."
"Microsoft Defender is always running. It is doing its job, so it is fine. I don't have any issues with the way it was implemented or how we are running it. We have been upgrading IT throughout the years, but there have been no issues."
"Defender is stable enough and is competitive with the other products in the market."
"Coming from an organization where the EDR wasn't strong, it has always been a case of basically searching through the information you already have and looking for something. It was basically trying to find the needle in a haystack. What the Defender platform does is that it reduces the size of the haystack, and it'll say that the needle is over here. Minutes matter, and it certainly zeros you in on the events that are concerning. It also simplifies the effort of trying to get some kind of correlation of behaviors or actions you see in the environment and confirming if something is benign or a threat."
"Mainly, it is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"It is manageable and integrates with other Microsoft products, which is crucial for me."
"The graphics and analysis in Microsoft Defender for IoT are very representative."
"I believe it is best suited for cloud services and is unmatched by other cloud security solutions."
"I find Microsoft Defender very effective in vulnerability management and it provides good attack reduction, making it a next-generation protection solution."
"Some advantages of Microsoft Defender for IoT are that it's easy to install on any OS, and you can create any custom use cases easily."
"As a cybersecurity consultant, the best part of Microsoft Defender for IoT is the capability to integrate with other tools such as Microsoft Sentinel and receive real-time alerts from the product."
 

Cons

"The solution can be more user-friendly."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is not as robust, and you cannot customize it much, so that's a challenge."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is secure but when it comes to security all solutions could improve security."
"The second major area for improvement involves enhanced capabilities for different operating systems or platforms. That is, even though we have coverage for different operating systems or platforms such as Linux, we don't get all of the controls and enhanced capabilities that are available with Windows devices."
"Microsoft Defender in the basic form is not very useful for managing the security environment. The free version is not capable of covering the needs of centralized management, EDR, and behavioral analysis. If you don't have the commercial version, you can't have centralized management and set up the policies and other things. Each client is a standalone installation, which is not useful for security in an enterprise model."
"From an audit point of view, our auditors would like to have more reports on how things are used, if things go wrong, and how they went wrong. For example, if something got a warning, "Why?" So, we would like more versatility for tracing and reporting. That would improve the product, as long as the user interface doesn't get bogged down."
"Some integration components for Mac should be added. We use both Windows 10 desktops and Mac desktops, but presently, the Mac component is still lagging a bit behind."
"Other vendors provide a lot of customization when it comes to integration, which every big organization requires. No big organization depends on one particular tool. Defender lacks that at this point."
"Customer service and support from Microsoft are costly. The execution by engineers is expensive, and the service is neither free nor toll-free, making it less accessible for customers."
"The documentation for Microsoft Defender for IoT is lacking. There are no clear steps or guidance, and updates are frequent, which adds to the confusion."
"Microsoft Defender for IoT is not scalable. If you want to monitor another industrial network, you need an additional server, making it less scalable."
"The primary area that needs improvement is compatibility with the latest IoT technologies."
"There are a few limitations with Microsoft Defender for IoT. We raised concerns with the product team because they don't capture all the information regarding command execution or processes executed on certain endpoints."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
"The only improvement I see is that some detection explanations are vaguely provided by Microsoft, resulting in generic IoT detections that alert me to an issue yet don't specify what's wrong."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is high for E5 licenses, but if we go with the E3 license, most of the features are not covered."
"For me, the pricing is very good, but for management it's very expensive. Other solutions are less expensive. But when I present all the information and all the reports they say, "Well, it's expensive, but the cost-benefit is very good.""
"You do not need to pay any additional costs for antivirus and anti-malware solutions for endpoint protection."
"Its price is fair. It has approximately the same price as the other products such as Kaspersky. It is much cheaper than Malwarebytes."
"The license cost is around $35 per machine, which is not expensive compared to other products."
"If we are acquiring everything in a single place, the front end becomes cost-effective."
"This product is included in the pricing for Windows."
"The pricing is competitive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business80
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise92
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for IoT?
I don't think I have any recommendation on improvements for Microsoft Defender for IoT because we don't use it too extensively. There are a few limitations with Microsoft Defender for IoT. We raise...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender for IoT?
Clients mainly use Microsoft Defender for IoT for unfamiliar sign-in attempts and Microsoft Defender EDRs. We are using use cases for unfamiliar sign-in and malicious activity, such as user sign-in...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
Azure Defender for IoT
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for IoT and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.