We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"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"
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"It does its job — it protects us from viruses. We don't really interact with it very much."
"A valuable feature offered by Sophos is called Naked Security, and it entails the control managed by the firewall on the site regarding the desktop client interfacing with our cloud client."
"The most valuable features are ease of use and the GUI."
"The stability on offer is fine."
"This solution can be used with any device, mobiles, desktops, or any appliances."
"The most effective features of Intercept X Endpoint for threat prevention are ransomware protection, miscellaneous behavior detection, and network threat protection."
"The key factor that attracted me to Sophos Intercept X was the multi-platform. I have multiple clients that have mixed environments of Mac and Windows. I am able to deliver a standard solution, regardless of the platform."
"Intercept X's smart prevention it's very good as so are its machine learning capabilities for troubleshooting channels and files."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature, in my opinion, is the dimension logging platform and the network traffic filtering."
"The interface is very good."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The support needs improvement."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Mobile device management is a challenging area, and it can be improved. Some areas in the DLP solution can also be improved. It has the DLP capability, but it is not an all-out DLP program. I would like to see them improve the DLP solution in terms of reporting and possibly network monitoring. Currently, they only do the reporting parts of it."
"The detection and the AI capabilities should be improved upon."
"In my opinion, there have been significant developments in the product. In my opinion, I don’t have any suggestions as of now, however I can suggest a cost deduction which will be beneficial for all the parties. It will also relieve our budget and benefit our team."
"I would like to see better support for virtual and desktop infrastructures."
"The deployment part needs to be improved."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"Intercept X Endpoint is a very heavy solution that consumes a lot of RAM and should be made lighter."
"The product defends very well on its own but could possibly use enhancement in giving users more controls."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) with 96 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 29th in EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) with 12 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. 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 WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". 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 WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Darktrace, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response report.
See our list of best EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) vendors.
We monitor all EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) 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.