We performed a comparison between Vade Cloud Core Email Protection and Vade for M365 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."The email protection is excellent, especially in terms of anti-phishing policies."
"The benefit that stands out to me is the ability for multiple individuals to collaborate simultaneously within the same document. Additionally, there is the option to save the document directly in the integrated OneDrive or SharePoint."
"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."
"It gives us visibility into threats and, for endpoints, it helps us to prioritize threats. We used to have a lack of visibility, but now our time to detect and respond has decreased."
"I like its investigation capabilities, as that is what is most important to me. It is fairly simple with a user-friendly interface."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"Safe attachments, safe links, policies, and the ability to protect from zero-day threats are the most valuable features."
"Some of the valuable features on the email side are anti-phishing, anti-malware, and Safe Links."
"The most valuable features of the solution are how the product works against phishing and provides centralization, allowing users to recognize phishing emails."
"It is a stable solution...My company has no worries about the deployment phase of Vade for Office 365."
"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."
"In some situations, it has not been able to pick impersonated emails having no attachments. Technical support definitely has a scope for improvement."
"The GUI is sometimes slow to fetch the device report and could be improved."
"Microsoft should provide more documentation for users so they can self-educate. I would like to see more documentation for advanced security features."
"You should be able to deploy Defender for every subscription without the need to add servers."
"We need to be able to whitelist data at the backend."
"The pre-sales cost calculations could be more transparent."
"Microsoft Defender for Office 365 must improve the overall management style, including the GUI. It also needs to change the filters so that it is easy to whitelist and blacklist data."
"Vade Cloud Email Security doesn't provide sandboxing functionality...when a bank needs to exchange or transfer such data, it has to be specific to a certain level of conformity, which I did not see in the tool."
"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 →
More Vade Cloud Core Email Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Vade Cloud Core Email Protection is ranked 46th in Email Security with 1 review while Vade for M365 is ranked 35th in Email Security with 1 review. Vade Cloud Core Email Protection is rated 0.0, while Vade for M365 is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of Vade Cloud Core Email Protection writes " A stable and scalable solution to deal with spam and phishing emails". 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". Vade Cloud Core Email Protection is most compared with , whereas Vade for M365 is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Avanan, Hornetsecurity Hornet.email, Proofpoint Email Protection and Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP).
See our list of best Email Security vendors and best Email Security vendors.
We monitor all Email Security 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.