We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Trend Micro Deep Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes out on top in this comparison. It is flexible and performs well. In addition, it is less expensive than Trend Micro Deep Security and has an impressive ROI.
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"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."
"The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"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."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"This software is easy to use."
"Defender is stable, I haven't had any problems with viruses when using it, and it's easy to update."
"The patch management is very easy, as it can be done automatically or added to a schedule."
"We are a Microsoft shop, and Defender is a Microsoft solution that provides some security at a reasonable cost."
"The intelligence mechanisms are good."
"Defender is stable. The performance is good."
"We use Microsoft Defender for the antivirus."
"I am satisfied with the performance, as well as the security."
"One of the most valuable features is that it's a firewall-based solution. We just open the required reports to the server—to server communication—and that's how we use Deep Security."
"The performance is good."
"Automated virtual patching is a good feature."
"In addition to providing our clients a view of what's happening in their data centers, it also does virtual patching in the data center. It enhances the security in the data center big time."
"The customer service/technical support for this solution is very fast."
"It serves its purpose and works well."
"The solution is quite secure."
"DLP, Data Loss Prevention, and the complexity of how we manage the console and how this client, or this tool, will notify us when there is something going wrong within the server and endpoint, is good."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"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."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"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."
"There are likely some technical improvements or features that could be added, however, I cannot say, off the top of my head, what they would be."
"I would like to see the next generation of the tool improved to work with other operating systems, like Linux."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by making the reporting faster. It takes some time to reflect back to the administration portal of what has been updated. For example, out of 100 Computers, approximately 90 computers received updates, but when you check the administration portal over one or two days, you will only see 75, even though 90 were updated."
"The frequency of the patching, and the frequency of the updates, are not included with the free version."
"It needs to improve the cybersecurity for lateral movements. For example, when a hacker tries to enter a machine, they try to get the password by doing a lateral movement."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can improve by providing more and different types of reports."
"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."
"I would like to see improvements made to how it secures activities on web pages."
"Some of the reporting and integrations could be more robust."
"I would like to see an EDR function for the servers, as that would be useful for us."
"I would like to see XDR features and endpoint sensor become available."
"There should be more tools to trace back. Some sort of module needs to be included to attach all the things. It should be more stable, and the traceback feature should be improved. There were cases when we got virtual analyzer or CMC errors. We got false-positive malware notifications, but we couldn't trace them. I raised a case with Trend Micro two or three times, but they couldn't resolve it. Their support should be improved in terms of technical abilities to troubleshoot complex issues. They should be more knowledgeable."
"Pricing is on the expensive side and could be more affordable. The technical support for Trend Micro Deep Security also needs improvement."
"I think more work could be done on Deep Security's ability to handle dynamic threat scenarios."
"I would like to see better pricing. The pricing could be lower."
"The product isn't very user-friendly."
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 114 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 25 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "Scalable and secure with an easy initial setup". Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec Endpoint Security, Sophos Intercept X, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Malwarebytes, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Micro Apex One, CrowdStrike Falcon, Carbon Black CB Defense, Symantec Endpoint Security and SentinelOne.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) 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.
