We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Morphisec based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The stability on offer is fine."
"This product integrates well with Sophos firewalls and should be seriously considered by Sophos Firewall clients."
"It is an intelligent tool."
"The most valuable feature is the supervisory side of it where we can watch the throughputs, and even the loading of the device, to see how much traffic is happening."
"It is easy to interact with, and its cost is also good."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature is the anti-ransomware capability. It's been helpful because we have been seeing a lot of information around what the ransomware hit."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos Intercept X is a web filtering and URL sanity checks. Overall the solution is well balanced with all its features."
"Morphisec's in-memory protection is probably the most valuable feature because it stops malicious activity from occurring. If something tries to install or act as a sleeper agent, Morphisec will detect and stop it."
"The simplicity of the solution, how easy it is to deploy and how small it is when deployed as an agent on a device, is probably the biggest aspect, given what it can do."
"Morphisec Guard enables us to see at a glance whether our users have device control and disk encryption enabled properly. This is important because we are a global company operating with multiple entities. Previously, we didn't have that visibility. Now, we have visibility so we can pinpoint some locations where there are machines that are not really protected, offline, etc. It gives us visibility, which is good."
"Morphisec makes use of deterministic attack prevention that doesn’t require investigation of security alerts. It changes the memory locations of where certain applications run. If you think of Excel, opening a PDF, running an Excel macro, or opening a webpage and clicking on a link, all of those actions run in a certain area of memory. Morphisec changes the memory locations of where those run."
"All the alerts are on the dashboard, which is quite simple and useful for us. You can easily check all the alerts that are being blocked or allowed, or whatever the action is. You can easily see that and you can take the necessary actions. You can add a PowerShell extension or any activities for blocking at your network level or for endpoints."
"Morphisec also provides full visibility into security events for Microsoft Defender and Morphisec in one dashboard... in the single pane of glass provided by Morphisec, it's all right there at your fingertips: easy to access and easy to understand. And if you choose to go down further to know everything from the process to the hash behind it, you can."
"It also provides full visibility into security events from Microsoft Defender and Morphisec in one dashboard. We've always had that capability with Morphisec. The more recent version appears to do that even a little bit more natively and it's given us visibility that we didn't have otherwise."
"Morphisec has enabled us to become a lot less paranoid when it comes to staff clicking on things or accessing things that they shouldn't that could infect the whole system. Our original ransomware attack that happened came from someone's Google drive and then just filtered on through that. It has put our minds at ease a lot more in running it. It's also another layer of security that has been proven to be effective for us."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The support needs improvement."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Features that should be improved in the upgrade involve the excessive consumption of the the solution's processor, RAM and resources."
"We would like more application control in order to be able to schedule times and access."
"Sophos needs to create a YouTube channel with educational material for technicians or engineers."
"The after sales service and support could be improved."
"There is some issue with the reporting and refreshing information on resources that have been eliminated."
"The solution can be expensive, although we do see the value in it."
"The integration has room for improvement, especially with Mac OS."
"The price of this solution can be improved."
"Sometimes it generates false positive alerts. They need to continue working on that. They have provided solutions for it and have fixed issues with updated versions. The service is quite good but they need to work on it more so that there are no false positive alerts."
"We started in the Linux platform and we deployed to Linux. The licensing of that has been kind of confusing between Linux licensing and Windows licensing. The overall simplicity of licensing or offering an enterprise license to just cover everything and then we don't have to count needs improvement."
"We wanted to have multi-tenants in their cloud platform, so every entity can look into their own systems and not see other systems in other entities. I have a beta version on that now. I would like them to incorporate that in the cloud solution."
"The weakest point of this product is how difficult it is to understand the reasons for an alert. This is a problem because it is hard to determine whether an attack is real or not."
"We have only had four attacks in the last year, "attacks" being some benign PDF from a vendor that, for some reason, were triggered. There were no actual attacks. They were just four false positives, or something lowly like adware. There have been false positives with both the on-premises solution and the cloud solution."
"If anything, tech support might be their weakest link. The process of getting someone involved sometimes takes a little time. It seems to me that they should have all the data they need to let me know whether an alert is legitimate or not, but they tend to need a lot of information from me to get to the bottom of something. It usually takes a little longer than I would expect."
"We sometimes have to depend on the support team to know what action we should take. If the solution for an alert can be built into the report that we are getting, it will save time, and the interaction with support would be less. At times, corrective action is required, but at times, we don't need to take any action. It would be good if we get to know in the report that a particular infection doesn't require any action. It will save us time and effort."
"It might be a bit much to ask, but we are now beginning to use Morphisec Scout, which provides vulnerability information. At this time, it's recognizing vulnerabilities and reporting them to us, but it's not necessarily resolving them. There's still a separate manual process to resolve those vulnerabilities, primarily through upgrades. We have to do that outside of Morphisec. If Morphisec could somehow have that capability built into it, that would be very effective."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 100 reviews while Morphisec is ranked 38th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 21 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Morphisec is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Morphisec writes "Light on the endpoint and does not have any performance hindrance on the endpoint". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security, whereas Morphisec is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Code42 Incydr, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Morphisec report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
