No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo

Top 10 Cisco Secure Endpoint Alternatives

Vendor: Cisco
4.3 out of 5
Leave a review

Top Cisco Secure Endpoint Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Cisco Secure Endpoint based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

Cisco Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Cisco, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
CrowdStrike Falcon excels in EDR capabilities, offering AI-driven threat detection and quick response. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint integrates well within the Cisco ecosystem, valued for threat analysis and cloud management. Both offer strong ROI but target enterprise needs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Report
CrowdStrike Falcon offers a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, providing a budget-friendly option. In contrast, Cisco provides a comprehensive feature set that may justify its higher initial investment for some users.
View comparison
Pricing
CrowdStrike Falcon offers a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, providing a budget-friendly option. In contrast, Cisco provides a comprehensive feature set that may justify its higher initial investment for some users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
4.2 out of 5
Cortex XDR offers efficient threat detection and integration with Palo Alto's ecosystem. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint delivers advanced automated response actions and extensive telemetry data. Cortex XDR requires enhancements in reporting and incident response, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint's policy management is complex. Cortex XDR is cost-effective, while Cisco Secure Endpoint justifies its higher price with extensive features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Report
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial setup.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in {valuable_features_data} and {features_overall_comparison}, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint stands out in terms of {valuable_features_data}. In comparison, Cisco users appreciate {feature_1}, {feature_2}, Microsoft users value {feature_3}, {feature_4}.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers a lower setup cost, making it a more cost-effective option for initial deployment.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers a lower setup cost, making it a more cost-effective option for initial deployment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint
4.4 out of 5
SentinelOne Singularity Complete enhances proactive protection with AI-driven features like ransomware rollback, providing operational efficiency. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers integration with Cisco security solutions, appealing to organizations within the Cisco ecosystem that seek extensive threat intelligence and collaborative capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint Report
SentinelOne Singularity Complete has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint may include hidden fees, highlighting a significant difference in pricing transparency and potential long-term expenses for businesses evaluating their cybersecurity options.
View comparison
Pricing
SentinelOne Singularity Complete has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint may include hidden fees, highlighting a significant difference in pricing transparency and potential long-term expenses for businesses evaluating their cybersecurity options.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
IBM Security QRadar
4.0 out of 5
IBM Security QRadar offers extensive compliance features, making it ideal for large enterprises. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in seamless integration within Cisco’s ecosystem. QRadar's comprehensive data handling contrasts with Secure Endpoint’s real-time threat detection and integration capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. IBM Security QRadar Report
IBM Security QRadar has a high setup cost, contrasting sharply with Cisco Secure Endpoint's more affordable initial expenses. This significant difference in setup investment can be a decisive factor for budget-conscious organizations.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Security QRadar has a high setup cost, contrasting sharply with Cisco Secure Endpoint's more affordable initial expenses. This significant difference in setup investment can be a decisive factor for budget-conscious organizations.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Huntress Managed EDR
4.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers seamless integration with Cisco products for robust security, while Huntress Managed EDR emphasizes ease of use and minimal deployment impact. In comparison, Huntress is ideal for cost-conscious SMBs, and Cisco appeals to users already embedded in its ecosystem.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Huntress Managed EDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint incurs significant setup costs, while Huntress Managed EDR offers more affordable implementation, highlighting a distinct cost difference for businesses evaluating security solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint incurs significant setup costs, while Huntress Managed EDR offers more affordable implementation, highlighting a distinct cost difference for businesses evaluating security solutions.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Elastic Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Elastic Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint features integration and threat intelligence, while Elastic Security excels in data analytics and anomaly detection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint would benefit from improved reporting. Elastic Security needs better documentation. Cisco Secure Endpoint is easier to deploy; Elastic Security offers strong community support.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Elastic Security Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint users report lower setup costs, while Elastic Security users mention higher setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint users report lower setup costs, while Elastic Security users mention higher setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
HP Wolf Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
HP Wolf Security
3.9 out of 5
HP Wolf Security is praised for its isolation technology, effectively containing threats before they spread. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced analytics and real-time threat detection. HP Wolf Security's seamless integration into workflows contrasts with Cisco Secure Endpoint's sophisticated analytics capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. HP Wolf Security Report
HP Wolf Security offers a low setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial investment but may provide long-term savings.
View comparison
Pricing
HP Wolf Security offers a low setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial investment but may provide long-term savings.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Tanium
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Tanium
3.9 out of 5
Tanium offers extensive endpoint management and real-time threat response, appealing to organizations valuing detailed control. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection and automated responses, ideal for those prioritizing streamlined security deployment and robust support infrastructure.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Tanium Report
Tanium typically incurs higher setup costs, providing robust security measures tailored for large enterprises. In contrast, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a more cost-effective initial setup, appealing to businesses seeking comprehensive security with budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
Tanium typically incurs higher setup costs, providing robust security measures tailored for large enterprises. In contrast, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a more cost-effective initial setup, appealing to businesses seeking comprehensive security with budget considerations.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform
3.9 out of 5
Trellix excels with advanced threat prevention and integration with security tools, offering a customizable dashboard for security management. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides seamless integration with Cisco products, focusing on network visibility and machine learning for extensive security coverage and continuous protection.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform Report
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform requires a significant setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial expenditure for users.
View comparison
Pricing
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform requires a significant setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial expenditure for users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender XDR
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in integrating with existing Cisco infrastructure, offering robust threat detection. In comparison, Microsoft Defender XDR provides comprehensive extended detection and response features with seamless integration into Microsoft products. Cisco's simplicity in deployment contrasts Microsoft's competitive pricing and versatile capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender XDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost and more complex implementation process, while Microsoft Defender XDR offers lower initial costs and simpler installation.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost and more complex implementation process, while Microsoft Defender XDR offers lower initial costs and simpler installation.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiEDR excels in pricing and support, offering strong endpoint protection and threat detection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides a comprehensive security suite with advanced features. Fortinet is noted for easier deployment, while Cisco's superior integration and long-term value attract tech buyers seeking robust performance.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fortinet FortiEDR Report
Fortinet FortiEDR offers competitive setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiEDR offers competitive setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
TrendAI Vision One
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
TrendAI Vision One
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint provides comprehensive real-time threat prevention with extensive integrations and user-friendly features suited for diverse environments. In comparison, TrendAI Vision One excels in machine learning-driven endpoint security and centralized visibility, appealing to buyers valuing robust analytics and a flexible pricing model.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. TrendAI Vision One Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a relatively low setup cost, offering budget-friendly implementation. In contrast, TrendAI Vision One requires a higher initial investment, reflecting its enhanced security features and advanced technology designed for comprehensive threat detection and response.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a relatively low setup cost, offering budget-friendly implementation. In contrast, TrendAI Vision One requires a higher initial investment, reflecting its enhanced security features and advanced technology designed for comprehensive threat detection and response.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Check Point Harmony Endpoint
4.4 out of 5
Check Point Harmony Endpoint offers comprehensive protection with innovative updates and centralized management. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in integration within the Cisco ecosystem, offering competitive pricing and flexibility. Each solution caters to distinct preferences for endpoint security and integration needs.
Download Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Check Point Harmony Endpoint offers a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint provides a more robust initial setup with potentially higher costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Check Point Harmony Endpoint offers a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint provides a more robust initial setup with potentially higher costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiClient
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiClient offers competitive pricing and comprehensive threat protection, appealing to those seeking easy integration within Fortinet's ecosystem. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection and seamless integration with Cisco's security products, attracting buyers interested in sophisticated features and substantial ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fortinet FortiClient Report
Fortinet FortiClient has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, emphasizing Fortinet's cost-efficiency. Cisco offers advanced features that may justify its higher setup cost for some users.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiClient has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, emphasizing Fortinet's cost-efficiency. Cisco offers advanced features that may justify its higher setup cost for some users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Symantec Endpoint Security
3.8 out of 5
Symantec Endpoint Security offers a comprehensive unified approach featuring threat intelligence and behavior analytics. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with advanced malware protection, sandboxing, and retrospective security. Symantec Endpoint Security needs optimization; Cisco Secure Endpoint requires enhanced detection capabilities. Users find Symantec straightforward to deploy; Cisco has superior service. Symantec provides competitive pricing; Cisco offers better ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security Report
Symantec Endpoint Security users report lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint setup costs are higher, indicating a significant price difference.
View comparison
Pricing
Symantec Endpoint Security users report lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint setup costs are higher, indicating a significant price difference.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BigFix
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BigFix
4.3 out of 5
BigFix excels in patch management and endpoint visibility, making it a cost-effective choice with strong ROI. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint delivers advanced threat detection and automation capabilities, justifying its higher price. Tech buyers seeking cost efficiency may choose BigFix; those prioritizing features may prefer Cisco.
Download BigFix vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
BigFix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its extensive feature set.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
BigFix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its extensive feature set.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform
4.1 out of 5
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform appeals to those seeking affordability and reliable support, excelling in malware detection and low system resource usage. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint's advanced threat intelligence and integration with other Cisco products justify its higher cost, benefiting large enterprises with detailed reporting.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. ESET Endpoint Protection Platform Report
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a more budget-friendly option.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum
4.0 out of 5
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum offers centralized management and robust integration, appealing to environments needing detailed security configurations. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides seamless Cisco product integration with cloud management, favored for environments already using Cisco's broader suite.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum Report
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum offers a more affordable setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a higher initial expense. The pricing difference may influence your decision based on budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum offers a more affordable setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a higher initial expense. The pricing difference may influence your decision based on budget considerations.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
TrendAI Vision One – Endpoint Security
4.1 out of 5
Trend Vision One offers competitive pricing with flexibility and robust features, making it ideal for multi-layer protection without extensive integration requirements. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides deep integration within Cisco environments, delivering comprehensive visibility and effective endpoint protection, especially alongside other Cisco products.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. TrendAI Vision One – Endpoint Security Report
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security is praised for its straightforward setup with minimal costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a higher initial setup expense. This cost difference highlights the upfront affordability of Trend Vision One compared to Cisco's more costly implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security is praised for its straightforward setup with minimal costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a higher initial setup expense. This cost difference highlights the upfront affordability of Trend Vision One compared to Cisco's more costly implementation.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cynet
4.4 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cynet
4.4 out of 5
Cynet offers cost-effective pricing with reliable support and automated threat detection, ideal for small to mid-sized businesses. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint, with its advanced features and integration, attracts enterprises looking for comprehensive protection. Cisco's robust support helps mitigate its more complex deployment process.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cynet Report
Cynet has a lower initial setup cost, making it more budget-friendly, while Cisco Secure Endpoint, though more expensive initially, provides extensive features.
View comparison
Pricing
Cynet has a lower initial setup cost, making it more budget-friendly, while Cisco Secure Endpoint, though more expensive initially, provides extensive features.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Intercept X Endpoint
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for its integration with Cisco infrastructure and customer support, while Intercept X Endpoint excels with deep learning and anti-exploit technology. In comparison, Intercept X Endpoint's advanced threat prevention justifies higher initial costs, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint offers competitive pricing and seamless Cisco ecosystem integration.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Intercept X Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup cost is described as "higher but manageable," while Intercept X Endpoint is noted for "significantly lower initial setup costs."
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup cost is described as "higher but manageable," while Intercept X Endpoint is noted for "significantly lower initial setup costs."
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint
3.9 out of 5
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint excels in detection capabilities and forensic tools, making it a strong choice for thorough threat analysis. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced threat hunting and seamless integration with Cisco tools, appealing to those needing versatile features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint Report
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint's setup cost is relatively high, while Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a lower upfront setup cost. This key difference may impact budget-conscious organizations when selecting between these endpoint security solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint's setup cost is relatively high, while Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a lower upfront setup cost. This key difference may impact budget-conscious organizations when selecting between these endpoint security solutions.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
WatchGuard EPDR
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
WatchGuard EPDR
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers comprehensive threat detection and cost-effective APT protection. In comparison, WatchGuard EPDR provides advanced automated detection and response. Cisco excels in customer service, while WatchGuard's higher cost justifies its advanced features. Cisco suits budget-conscious buyers, whereas WatchGuard appeals to those seeking feature-rich solutions.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. WatchGuard EPDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint is praised for its relatively low setup cost, while WatchGuard EPDR is noted for having a higher initial investment required.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint is praised for its relatively low setup cost, while WatchGuard EPDR is noted for having a higher initial investment required.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR
4.2 out of 5
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR excels in pricing and support. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers comprehensive features and value. Bitdefender features effective threat detection and user-friendly management, whereas Cisco provides advanced analytics and detailed reporting. Customers appreciate Bitdefender's affordability and Cisco's long-term investment returns.
Download Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is praised for its relatively low setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial setup expenses. Bitdefender appeals to budget-conscious organizations, whereas Cisco caters to businesses ready to invest more upfront.
View comparison
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is praised for its relatively low setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial setup expenses. Bitdefender appeals to budget-conscious organizations, whereas Cisco caters to businesses ready to invest more upfront.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender for Business
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers integration within Cisco's ecosystem, excelling in real-time threat intelligence. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Business integrates seamlessly with Microsoft 365 and Azure, providing ease of use for organizations within Microsoft environments, emphasizing cost-effectiveness and straightforward deployment.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Business Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint often has a higher setup cost, reflecting its advanced features, while Microsoft Defender for Business provides a more cost-effective setup, appealing to smaller enterprises.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint often has a higher setup cost, reflecting its advanced features, while Microsoft Defender for Business provides a more cost-effective setup, appealing to smaller enterprises.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Bitdefender Total Security
4.4 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is valued for its advanced threat detection and seamless integration with Cisco products. In comparison, Bitdefender Total Security offers comprehensive protection and features like a secure VPN. Cisco Secure Endpoint's superior customer service contrasts with Bitdefender Total Security's affordability and extensive coverage.
Download Bitdefender Total Security vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which provides a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which provides a more budget-friendly option.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Digital Guardian
3.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Digital Guardian
3.7 out of 5
Digital Guardian offers strong data loss prevention, while Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection and endpoint visibility. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with robust threat management features. Digital Guardian benefits from competitive pricing and solid ROI. Both have user-friendly deployments and well-regarded customer service.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Digital Guardian Report
Digital Guardian has moderate setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Digital Guardian has moderate setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for higher initial expenses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Malwarebytes Teams
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Malwarebytes Teams
4.0 out of 5
Malwarebytes Teams provides efficient threat response and scalability, appealing to users with simple cloud management and competitive pricing. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in advanced threat protection and integration, offering flexible pricing and detailed analytics for enterprise users.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Malwarebytes Teams Report
Malwarebytes Teams offers a lower setup cost, emphasizing budget-friendly options, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, highlighting a feature-rich solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Malwarebytes Teams offers a lower setup cost, emphasizing budget-friendly options, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, highlighting a feature-rich solution.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
NetWitness NDR
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
NetWitness NDR
4.0 out of 5

Features: NetWitness NDR excels in detailed threat analysis and real-time monitoring. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for comprehensive malware detection and integration with Cisco products.

Room For Improvement: NetWitness NDR could improve reporting and dashboard customization. Cisco Secure Endpoint would benefit from better response times and reduced false positives.

Ease Of Deployment and Customer Service: NetWitness NDR offers straightforward deployment and responsive support. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint has mixed deployment reviews and occasional support delays.

Pricing and ROI: NetWitness NDR is seen as cost-effective with good ROI. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint's higher pricing is justified by its comprehensive features and integration benefits.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. NetWitness NDR Report
NetWitness NDR's setup cost is higher compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
NetWitness NDR's setup cost is higher compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable setup cost.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response
3.9 out of 5

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers intuitive design and real-time monitoring. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced malware protection and integration with other Cisco products. Cybereason simplifies management, while Cisco's extensive reporting aids security. Cybereason is cost-effective; Cisco's comprehensive feature set justifies higher costs.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Report
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has higher initial expenses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5

Cisco Secure Endpoint is preferred for its extensive support and pricing structure. In comparison, Morphisec stands out with innovative features and a proactive approach. Cisco also has comprehensive threat detection, while Morphisec excels in lightweight protection.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Morphisec Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Morphisec, which is more affordable for small to medium businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Morphisec, which is more affordable for small to medium businesses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint impresses with robust threat detection and integration features, complemented by strong customer support. In comparison, Datto EDR excels in ease of deployment and offers cost-effective ROI. Cisco may require customization, whereas Datto's straightforward deployment appeals to tech buyers.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a cost-effective setup with straightforward pricing, while Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a higher initial setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive feature set.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a cost-effective setup with straightforward pricing, while Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a higher initial setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive feature set.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity
4.0 out of 5
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity excels in AI-driven malware detection requiring minimal resources. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers extensive threat prevention and integration across its security portfolio. BlackBerry prioritizes AI efficiency, while Cisco emphasizes endpoint visibility and comprehensive real-time analysis.
Download BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint. Cisco Secure Endpoint demands higher initial investment, potentially suitable for businesses with greater budget flexibility.
View comparison
Pricing
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint. Cisco Secure Endpoint demands higher initial investment, potentially suitable for businesses with greater budget flexibility.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Kaspersky Next EDR Expert
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in cloud-based management and integration with Cisco products, offering extensive coverage. In comparison, Kaspersky focuses on advanced analytics and machine learning for effective malware protection, with a particular strength in intrusion prevention.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Next EDR Expert Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup costs are higher than those of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, highlighting a significant price difference.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup costs are higher than those of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, highlighting a significant price difference.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​
3.9 out of 5
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is noted for its lightweight design, affordable price, and AI-driven features suited for diverse cloud environments. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced threat protection and seamless integration within complex systems, despite higher costs for its comprehensive capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ Report
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection has a lower initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which may suit businesses looking for a more cost-effective solution.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection has a lower initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which may suit businesses looking for a more cost-effective solution.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Sophos Endpoint
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Sophos Endpoint
4.1 out of 5
Sophos Endpoint excels in virus definitions and synchronized security integration, appealing to those valuing centralized management. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers robust detection with file trajectory and simplifies enterprise agreements, attracting buyers needing comprehensive visibility and seamless tool integration.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Sophos Endpoint Report
Sophos Endpoint has a lower initial setup cost, making it a budget-friendly choice for small businesses, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its robust feature set suitable for larger enterprises.
View comparison
Pricing
Sophos Endpoint has a lower initial setup cost, making it a budget-friendly choice for small businesses, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its robust feature set suitable for larger enterprises.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is valued for its integration capabilities and robust threat intelligence. In comparison, Deep Instinct offers proactive threat prevention with advanced machine learning. Cisco is noted for straightforward deployment and competitive pricing, while Deep Instinct attracts those seeking innovative security features and lower incident response costs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has lower setup costs compared to Deep Instinct Prevention Platform, which has higher setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has lower setup costs compared to Deep Instinct Prevention Platform, which has higher setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Seqrite Endpoint Security
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced threat detection and high-quality support services, making it suitable for organizations seeking robust security features. In comparison, Seqrite Endpoint Security provides cost-effective security with a user-friendly management console and efficient performance, appealing to budget-conscious buyers.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Seqrite Endpoint Security Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, whereas Seqrite Endpoint Security is generally seen as budget-friendly.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, whereas Seqrite Endpoint Security is generally seen as budget-friendly.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Heimdal Endpoint Security
4.5 out of 5
Heimdal Endpoint Security enhances threat detection, integrating smoothly with existing systems. Users value its real-time monitoring and ransomware protection capabilities. There is room for improvement in customization options and reporting features, ensuring it meets diverse user requirements efficiently.
View comparison
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is renowned for its integration capabilities and real-time protection. In comparison, Trellix EDR excels in behavioral analytics and forensic abilities. Cisco's broad coverage benefits existing Cisco customers, while Trellix offers superior threat detection, justifying its higher cost with long-term ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint is typically lauded for its straightforward and cost-effective setup, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) often encounters criticism for its higher initial setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint is typically lauded for its straightforward and cost-effective setup, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) often encounters criticism for its higher initial setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Avast Business Hub
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Avast Business Hub
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint impresses with advanced threat detection and strong customer support, justifying its higher cost. In comparison, Avast Business Hub stands out for its easy-to-use VPN and detailed reports, despite needing better customization options. Both excel in deployment but differ in their specialized features.
Download Avast Business Hub vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, while Avast Business Hub offers a more cost-effective setup. This difference may influence budget-conscious businesses toward Avast Business Hub.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, while Avast Business Hub offers a more cost-effective setup. This difference may influence budget-conscious businesses toward Avast Business Hub.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager
4.2 out of 5
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager offers robust protection with user-friendly integration, ideal for simpler setups. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with advanced threat detection, justifying its higher price for comprehensive features suitable for complex environments. Ivanti provides competitive pricing and good ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager Report
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable entry point for users.
View comparison
Pricing
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable entry point for users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in pricing and support, making it an attractive option for cost-conscious buyers. In comparison, Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is desirable for its feature-rich platform and advanced analytics, justifying a higher cost with superior long-term value.
Download Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint typically incurs higher upfront setup costs, whereas Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security offers more affordable initial setup fees, highlighting a significant cost difference.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint typically incurs higher upfront setup costs, whereas Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security offers more affordable initial setup fees, highlighting a significant cost difference.

Related categories

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
Cisco Security Portfolio