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

NetWitness NDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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

NetWitness NDR
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
59th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (39th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (63rd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (24th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (20th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (38th)
OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of NetWitness NDR is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

SupravatMaji - PeerSpot reviewer
Beneficial single unified dashboard, good native application integration, and high availability
My advice to those wanting to implement RSA NetWitness Network is they have to first do a little due diligence, such as the exact requirement based on their needs. That will give them a direction for their investment because otherwise, the bill of material or bill of quantity (BOQ) may be higher side. It is important to do good due intelligence on the environment, see the exact requirement, and then go ahead with the solution. The solution is perfectly stable. I rate RSA NetWitness Network a nine out of ten.
Urs Schuerch - PeerSpot reviewer
A tool that offers good UI and documentation
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection had sent me a physical installation medium, which was very easy to obtain and deploy. It was also easy to configure, and it had a nice UI. I didn't have any problems with the product. I think that Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is very transparent about the pricing models offered to users. The tool also maintains transparency about the features and specifications. Previously, when I compared the two products with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, I saw that with Trend Micro, it is very difficult to transparently find out what it offers and how much it charges for it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the way it captures the traffic, and it contains every detail of the communication."
"NetWitness Endpoint's most valuable features are its interoperability across many different operating systems and the ease of pivoting from network to endpoint via a single console."
"Ability to isolate the machine when there are malicious files."
"Technical support is knowledgeable."
"This solution allows us to locate the malware in real-time."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Network is the single unified dashboard from which you can manage all the different products of RSA. Additionally, the integration with native applications is good."
"They have recently updated the features and the most valuable ones are the instant threat response, ease of use, web interface, integration, and easy access. RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very compatible with other solutions and technologies. However, they do not rely on third-party solutions and have most features built-in."
"RSA NetWitness does market analysis in a more granular form. It gives you full visibility."
"Doesn't consume resources or affect the computer performance at all."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is very scalable."
"Webroot's tech support is pretty good; they've given me some pointers."
"Probably, compared to other antivirus programs, what we like about it is it is lightweight."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"The solution is very simple and straightforward to use."
"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."
"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."
 

Cons

"The contamination feature could be improved."
"I would like to see Security Orchestration and Response Automation (SOAR) integration."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"Its price could be improved. It is an expensive product. Its training is also too expensive. It would be great if they can have a better pricing scheme for the training."
"The deployment process is complex. I don't know why, but this solution will suddenly stop working. Logs stop coming. Often, one thing or another stops working. Most of the time, one of my team members is working with troubleshooting and working with technical support. Log passing is also one of the biggest challenge."
"RSA NetWitness Network could improve on integration with non-native application integration."
"When analyzing something, you have to click several times. It requires a lot of effort to find something."
"This solution needs an upgrade in reporting. I have heard from RSA that they are working on this, but as of yet it is not available."
"They should provide more information on the type of cyber attacks."
"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"Its detection capability for certain attacks should be improved. It should have better and wider detection for certain malware attacks. It could also have some sort of RMN."
"I believe that Webroot Business Endpoint Protection should offer a more modern UI."
"The only complaint I have with Webroot is its inability to prevent UoD phishing and its inability to check against bots or block anti-attacks. Plus the URL server is in zero-definition."
"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"With RSA, there is flexibility in choosing the service, products, and the range that meets your requirement, as well as they are flexible in terms of pricing."
"We are on a three-year contract to use RSA NetWitness Network."
"They can easily adjust if you have the requirements which are required. If you have a budget cut or a budget constraint, they can bend."
"I do not have any opinion on the pricing or licensing of the product."
"It is highly scalable. It can be bought based on your requirements."
"It is an expensive product."
"NetWitness Endpoint is less costly than its competitors, but it offers fewer features."
"The cost depends on the number of endpoints that you want to monitor, but it is not expensive."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."
"If you purchase for clients, then you are the managing billing entity. It's better to either get a monthly subscription check from your clients, or to prepay for the year (so as to not keep cash in reserve to pay the bill each month) IMHO."
"We evaluate other options using multiple choices, best value, management and functionality."
"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."
"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."
"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."
"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."
"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
863,641 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
16%
Real Estate/Law Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.
What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.
 

Also Known As

RSA ECAT, NetWitness Network
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Mytech Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about NetWitness NDR vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
863,641 professionals have used our research since 2012.