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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Microsoft Entra Verified ID 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) (3rd)
Microsoft Entra Verified ID
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 7.5%, down from 8.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Entra Verified ID is 1.5%, down from 1.7% 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 Endpoint7.5%
Microsoft Entra Verified ID1.5%
Other91.0%
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.
MuhammadWaqar - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Director at Interwood Mobel Pvt Ltd
Supports user management and authentication but needs simpler hybrid integration for broader adoption
I believe there should be an easy provision for the on-premises and for the hybrid environment in Microsoft Entra Verified ID, as there seems to be some difficulty with hybrid implementations, especially in a country like Pakistan where most are transitioning to cloud but not fully migrating, instead opting for hybrid solutions. An ease for hybrid integration would greatly help the technical teams. I believe the policy implementation is a little bit complex on the Microsoft side; there should be a simpler way to implement policies, utilizing standardized templates for compliance, such as industry-specific templates for the service industry, which would be helpful for HIPAA and other compliances.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"The antivirus is the most valuable feature."
"The integration with all variations of Microsoft Defender, for Endpoint, 365, and Cloud is valuable."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's most valuable feature is its ease of use."
"Defender for Endpoint allows us automatic resolutions if a unit is compromised or if a user clicks a malicious link."
"Auto-remediation: When the product sees malware, it resolves the issue immediately. This protects the machine."
"In terms of the installation, ease of use, and user interface, Defender has been great so far."
"The best thing I like about it is its interaction with the other Defender products. It provides the ability to push telemetry up. It gives me endpoint visibility and allows me to take automated actions."
"Microsoft Entra Verified ID has helped reduce fraud or impersonation attacks because if you are using a government-sanctioned ID, what is more secure than that?"
"The most valuable features of the solution are mainly in the areas of security and auditing."
"I like the Microsoft Authenticator app since it comes with two-factor authentication."
"I find Microsoft Dynamics 365 very easy and useful because most of the users on our end are using Microsoft, thus they are very familiar with the Microsoft Office stack, and some of SharePoint and Teams."
"The authentication features of Microsoft Entra Verified ID are valuable. As an infrastructure professional, I appreciate the exceptional integration between on-premises Active Directory features and Entra ID."
"I would recommend this solution to others because it's simple enough to deploy."
"The MFA number matching feature effectively prevents unauthorized access by phishing bad actors who might obtain email credentials. This feature requires users to verify a number on their screen, ensuring they only approve genuine requests."
"Microsoft Entra Verified ID has smoothed out our identity verification process and made it easier for us to authenticate users, making us more confident about our users being who they say they are so we can trust that we have secure logins for all our users."
 

Cons

"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."
"Sometimes, there are different skews. In a basic skew, they should have basic log analysis without the need to integrate with any third-party or SIEM solutions, like Sentinel. This would make it so much easier for users who don't have log collection or log analysis."
"If you have multi-cloud like Google and AWS, the native solutions are better for those particular cases."
"The product development team makes frequent changes that affect the stability of the solution."
"Sometimes, there are difficulties in downloading a file considered as malicious."
"The solution can be more user-friendly."
"Notifications are always popping up — I hate that."
"The solution could be even more secure and provide an even higher level of security."
"There is room for improvement in Microsoft Entra Verified ID, particularly in the integration with other platforms, as they could do better with the API, for example."
"While Microsoft continues to improve the solution, integrating the ID with biometric features could be enhanced, especially in terms of standard B2C flows for multi-factor authentication. Improvements in remembering devices and the timing of MFA triggers could also be beneficial."
"Microsoft products basically have no support other than the knowledge base, so I would give it a two out of 10."
"I have not really seen return on investment with Microsoft Entra Verified ID."
"I believe there should be an easy provision for the on-premises and for the hybrid environment in Microsoft Entra Verified ID, as there seems to be some difficulty with hybrid implementations, especially in a country like Pakistan where most are transitioning to cloud but not fully migrating, instead opting for hybrid solutions."
"The tool's expensive nature is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I must do two-factor authentication when I sign in from a different location. It creates friction. It's not personalized for the end user. I would like to see specific insights."
"There are issues with the integration of Microsoft Entra Verified ID and MFA. Sometimes, the MFA process doesn't succeed, requiring users to sign out and log back in."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution comes free with Microsoft Windows 10."
"Microsoft has different plans for buying this product. The price depends on the configuration of the full set of products that you buy and on the licensing program in your contract."
"We have a bundle where the price includes all Microsoft products."
"The subscription is part of Windows, so we don't have to pay anything extra for this product."
"The nice thing about Defender and Sentinel is that the cost is based on the data logs that you ingest from the Defender endpoints and data connectors. I don't have to buy a 25- or 50- or 1,000-user or enterprise license. I can buy one license at a time."
"The E5 license is the one that I recommend because it comes with Cloud App Security, which is a good thing to have on top of Microsoft Defender."
"It is an expensive solution. It would be nice if it could be included with the Microsoft Office package."
"The licensing costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are reasonable."
"The pricing and setup are standard. With Entra, you choose between P1 and P2 licenses. We recommend having at least one P2 license in a company for better alert management, even though P2 is more expensive."
"I still feel the pricing is on the higher side for larger customers. They don't pay anything for on-prem Active Directory. Although we receive additional features with Microsoft’s SSO, pricing is an area Microsoft can work on."
"If one is cheap and ten is very expensive, I rate the product price as seven."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business80
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise92
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise4
 

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 Entra Verified ID?
It is hard for me to say how Microsoft Entra Verified ID can be improved. I really do not know the extent of how that can benefit everything. I am trying to learn that here at the Ignite conference.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Entra Verified ID?
My main use cases for Microsoft Entra Verified ID are verifying the end user saying who they are and being able to back that up with government-issued proof.
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Entra Verified ID?
My organization has not implemented the Face Check feature yet; we are using YubiKeys. My organization's trust in digital interactions really has not changed since implementing Microsoft Entra Veri...
 

Also Known As

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

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 Entra Verified ID and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.