We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Users praised Symantec Endpoint Security for its regular virus signature updates and comprehensive administrator's console. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures. Reviewers said Symantec Endpoint Security could improve its graphical interface, Linux support, and scanning capabilities.
Service and Support: Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness. Some users said Symantec customer service was helpful but slow, while others have expressed general dissatisfaction with support.
Ease of Deployment: Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation. Some users said Symantec Endpoint Security was easy to set up, while others struggled with the installation. Deployment time varies depending on the customer’s environment.
Pricing: Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale. The cost of Symantec Endpoint Security depends on the licensing terms and necessary security components. While some users find the price acceptable, others believe it could be more affordable.
ROI: Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment. Symantec Endpoint Security demonstrates strong stability and incident prevention, leading to reduced downtime. It offers a favorable return on investment.
"The stability is very good."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Sophos Intercept X is easy to install and has a lower price than similar solutions."
"Everything in Intercept X Endpoints is much centralised which makes it easy for our team to work with. The functions are in a single portal."
"The solution's initial setup process was straightforward."
"The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing."
"The most valuable feature is the behavioral, non-signature-based threat detection."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"It's quite simple to use and user friendly."
"Machine learning is used to detect the threat and it does so by prioritizing the suspicious activities."
"The features I find the most valuable are the protection, the encryption, and the DLP."
"The pricing is pretty good."
"Its response time is the most valuable. It is very quick."
"When they started they found it very easy; not easy to implement but easy to use. We started with the headquarters here and later we also implemented it for all the subsidiaries in the region, in other countries. They have a centralized solution, so they can help other countries in management."
"Symantec is very user-friendly, the interface and functions are very simple for everyone to understand. Additionally, it's a very robust system."
"The dashboard view and reporting are valuable. It is stable and easy to integrate, and it provides custom options."
"The solution offers very good security features and is comparable to Sophos."
"If there is exposure, we need to investigate the source of the attack, e.g., whether it came from the network or externally. We view the firewall logs, and if there has been exposure, then we use the Application Isolation feature. When there is an attack with on-prem, that system will go into isolation mode, removing connectivity to other internal systems. We also restrict the WLAN part to avoid that system broadcasting to other networks."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"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."
"They should work on the logs and events. Sophos Intercept X needs to increase the interface test so that it can export to a live event."
"We are considering switching from this solution as a result of the closer integration needed between the firewall systems and the EDR."
"The choices offered for the on-premises and cloud-based platforms are the reverse of each other."
"It could be a bit easier to implement."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
"I am not very satisfied with the product's reporting overall, and it needs improvement in this area."
"We would like to deploy across a variety of machines simultaneously through the network."
"To be a perfect product, the price would have to be a bit better."
"The technical support could improve because when you reach level one support there is a lot of delays."
"The malware and ransomware protections could be improved, which was ultimately the reason why I stopped using the solution."
","
"Symantec has not properly promoted Symantec Endpoint Security in the market. In my opinion, the product should be properly promoted."
"They lack the visibility you get in a heuristical, artificial, AI type of product, like a next-gen antivirus."
"Using the management console is a bit complex. There are many features that we cannot use and we could use some help. We need some assistance to make them work better. They need to add features to make it simpler."
"Since the acquisition by Broadcom, we are no longer receiving the proper support."
"If there is a suspicious file, it is put into a sandbox where Symantec does an analysis. After the analysis, Symantec marks the file as a risk, but it doesn't blacklist or block the file. If a file is already known to be harmful, I would like them to automatically block or blacklist it to reduce the damage."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 100 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 139 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (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.
Having used both I'd go with something other than either of these two solutions.
Both deep dive onto your local computers making them impossible to remove, Should the need arise you'll end up having to reimage equipment to fully remove the products. Bloated and they dig their hands into everything on the local machines.
If these are your only two choices, then go with Sophos as it's a MUCH better product.
If you refer to the MITRE Attack analysis, BitDefender is the best, in terms of 100% accuracy and the most number of detections, for the second consecutive year.
@Udhayakumar Murugan,
First, I don't know the budget of yours (which is important) and if you have a budget then you must choose two different vendors to protect you.
And you must have a hardware firewall - it's your first protection layer and you can choose Sophos firewall + Kaspersky endpoint or FortiGate firewall + Sophos endpoint.
My advice to you: FortiGate firewall and Kaspersky endpoint.