We performed a comparison between Proofpoint Email Protection and Vade for M365 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about TitanHQ, Proofpoint, Sophos and others in Office 365 Protection."Defender is a SaaS platform, so it offers more flexibility. Managing the permissions is easier. The solution's automated detection and response features are scalable."
"Microsoft Defender has a feature to protect each and every attachment. Even if it's an encrypted attachment, it will check for any potential threats."
"Defender enables us to secure all 365-related activity from a single place. It gives us visibility into everything happening in Outlook, protecting us against phishing and other email-based threats. Defender helps us detect any suspicious behaviors."
"There are several features that I consider valuable."
"Does a thorough job of examining email and URLs for malicious content."
"The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is protection against malicious links, fishing, and impersonation. You can train people to be aware of these threats, but they're not always careful. When they're using their phones between meetings, they click on a link, and it's game over."
"Its main defense is to stop malicious emails from coming through. There is a sandbox environment where you can open malicious or suspicious emails to make sure that they're not malicious, instead of taking the risk of having your employees do it. This is definitely something that everybody needs nowadays, especially with the rise in cyber attacks."
"The spam filter for email is good."
"There is no downtime."
"The most valuable features are the business email compromise protection and targeted attack prevention."
"The anti-spam features are excellent on the email firewalls."
"I like all the features with Proofpoint, such as how it filters the spam and marketing mail, lost reality mail, blocks phishing attacks, blocks malicious attachments, and stops phishing links. Also it can defend against the business email compromise impersonation technique. It is a complete solution for all email attacks. It filters for the bad, malicious attachments. If there is any executable file, it can be deleted. It is a good, complete solution."
"Proofpoint Email Protection is a good product, and its most beneficial feature is the Threat Response Auto-Pull. I also like that it's an integrated email security solution."
"Proofpoint Email Protection offers an additional layer of protection compared to other brands like Microsoft, Mimecast, and Barracuda. While these major companies excel at detecting malicious attachments, the solution goes further by analyzing the context of emails, allowing for more nuanced decision-making."
"It is a stable solution...My company has no worries about the deployment phase of Vade for Office 365."
"Several simulation options are available within 365, and the phishing simulation could be better."
"They have moved features from one console to another. Things have been moved around in the interface and it takes me time to find where certain features are."
"The certification training for Defender for 365 needs to be deeper and incorporate Sentinel. I took all the security courses except one, and Sentinel isn't included."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"We are always looking for others tools to increase automation on tasks. There can be better integration with other solutions, such as PowerPoint and email."
"The GUI is sometimes slow to fetch the device report and could be improved."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"Proofpoint Email Protection's interface is confusing and could be improved."
"Sometimes it detects false positives."
"The flexibility of the solution can be improved."
"There is room for improvement in detecting and preventing phishing attacks. While the solution performs well in some aspects, it struggles with phishing threats."
"The scalability can be improved, and the solution can be optimized."
"Integration for reporting needs to be improved, it's too complex."
"Proofpoint should have better integration with complex environments that need more than one instance of Proofpoint, as there are issues with nested instances."
"Proofpoint Email Protection could improve by allowing more customization of the reports, such as exceptions and black-and-white lists."
"Concerning a bank, data can be confidential, and when a bank needs to transfer such data, it has to be specific to a certain level of conformity, which I did not see in the product."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
Proofpoint Email Protection is ranked 2nd in Office 365 Protection with 44 reviews while Vade for M365 is ranked 8th in Office 365 Protection with 1 review. Proofpoint Email Protection is rated 8.4, while Vade for M365 is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of Proofpoint Email Protection writes "A reasonably priced product that offers protection to emails, along with spam filters". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Vade for M365 writes "A stable tool capable of detecting malware while focusing on anti-phishing to protect its users". Proofpoint Email Protection is most compared with Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Cisco Secure Email, Fortinet FortiMail and KnowBe4, whereas Vade for M365 is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Avanan, Hornetsecurity Hornet.email, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP) and Mailinblack.
See our list of best Office 365 Protection vendors and best Email Security vendors.
We monitor all Office 365 Protection 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.