BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

Why PeerSpot?

BlackBerry and Microsoft are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. BlackBerry is ranked #34, while Microsoft is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.4. BlackBerry holds a 1.8% mindshare in EPP, compared to Microsoft’s 6.4% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of BlackBerry users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compete in the cybersecurity field. Both products have their strengths; however, Microsoft Defender seems to have the upper hand with its extensive integration capabilities and centralized management features that are particularly appealing to enterprise environments.

Features: BlackBerry Cylance is appreciated for its AI-driven malware detection and the ability to protect systems against zero-day threats while being resource-efficient. It effectively catches malware and ransomware without relying on constant updates. Microsoft Defender provides comprehensive protection with cloud-based analytics, real-time alerts, and seamless integration with other Microsoft products, making it a robust solution for threat protection.

Room for Improvement: BlackBerry Cylance could improve by reducing the incidence of false positives and offering better technical support and integration with other tools. Users also suggest enhancements in its user interface design. Microsoft Defender faces challenges with integration complexities, occasionally cumbersome user interfaces, and a need for better threat intelligence to streamline management across its various dashboards.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BlackBerry Cylance offers flexibility in deployment across different environments but receives mixed reviews on technical support, with issues of slow response times. Microsoft Defender benefits from its integration within the Microsoft ecosystem, easing deployment in existing setups. Its customer service is noted for excellence, particularly via managed service providers, though some users see the need for improved initial setup support.

Pricing and ROI: BlackBerry Cylance is considered robust but pricey, with users valuing its security despite concerns about long-term costs. Microsoft Defender is often seen as cost-effective, especially for enterprises using Microsoft Windows or Microsoft 365, though the addition of extra features may raise expenses. Overall, users find the investment justifiable given its comprehensive protection and seamless integration.

To learn more, read our detailed BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.8%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 6.4%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint	6.4%
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.8%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity	1.8%
Other	88.0%

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk

Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration

Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.

Read full review

Sooraj Makkancherrry

Security Operations Manager at Philips

Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT

I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.

Read full review

Robert Arbuckle

Security Analyst III at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees

Automatically isolates threats and integrates with logging to reduce response time

Overall, I would evaluate the Microsoft support level that I receive at probably about a seven, but that depends on the day. It has been spotty. We have had issues where the urgency level of the Microsoft support is not as high as ours, especially during a data breach or potential data breach situation. We have had issues with some of the offshore support being lackluster. One specific thing that comes to mind is we were on a support call with our CISO on the call, and the Microsoft agent, who did not actually work for Microsoft, is one of the vendors that Microsoft uses for support, said, "Just to set expectations, my lunch break is in an hour and I am going to go away then." For us, it was already ten o'clock at night and we had been working on this for a couple of hours, trying to get a security engineer on with us. For him to tell us that he was going to go away and have lunch, it was, "Okay, but go find somebody else if you need to." It was just the lackluster approach, and it seemed like he did not really care. We seem to get a lot of this when we get non-Microsoft support. I can identify areas for improvement with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, as it is kind of a convoluted mess to try to take care of false positives. Especially when they have been identified as false positives but they keep going off over and over again. It is great for my pocketbook because it generates a lot of on-call action, but I would really prefer more sleep at two o'clock in the morning than dealing with false positives. I would say that the unified portal for managing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is suitable for both teams as they are all in there. It would be great if they would stop moving things around and renaming things, which makes sense. The new XDR portal is pretty nice. Being able to have it central again inside of the regular Security Center without having to open up two windows is helpful. Overall, I think it is pretty good. There is always going to be something that could be improved, such as alerting and the ability to modify alerts would be a little bit helpful to have. Being able to add more data into the alerts and turn off alerts that are not as useful would be beneficial. It is hard to say what the quantitative impact the security exposure management feature has had on our company's security, because a lot of it is kind of subjective. I think we are sitting at around a fifty percent score still, and a lot of it is just kind of unusual circumstances that we cannot really implement without breaking the organization.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"When the pandemic started, Palo Alto came up with many solutions, which helped with the quick shift from on-premises to the cloud."

"Stability is one of the features we like the most."

"From a single pane of glass, you can easily manage all of your endpoints."

"It is a simple platform to use."

"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."

"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."

"The behavior-based detection feature is valuable."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks's ability to block sophisticated threats in real time is quite good and is on par with SentinelOne's."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"A user can continue to add endpoints and the solution will continue to perform well."

"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."

"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."

"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."

"From an administrative overhead point of view, there is a 75% reduction in administrating the solution."

"It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating."

"Has good RAM capacity for the power I need"

"We chose the solution because it doesn't have daily updates, which is important for us in healthcare IT, where network usage and connectivity to hospitals matter."

More BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity pros

"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."

"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."

"The most important feature is the way it monitors the threats and blocks them. About 10 days ago, we were implementing SOC for a particular client. The SOC was not yet implemented, but they had Microsoft Defender. That organization was hit by some ransomware, but the hacker could not succeed. Because of the EDR, the hacker could not install the hacking tools. They were trying to do that, but Microsoft Defender completely blocked that. The hacker could log into the system, but they could not install anything."

"It's stable."

"We saw a return on our investment within the first two years."

"The stability is great. I haven't seen any outages with Microsoft."

"It's a very complete application. I have all the controls in one site. I can track emails, attacks, and threats, and I can research information. I really like this configuration because I have all the information in place."

"What I like best is that it is part of the operating system, as opposed to a third-party application."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pros

Cons

"The product's pricing could be better."

"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."

"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."

"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."

"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."

"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."

"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"For advanced security, I wouldn't."

"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."

"Enhancing the product's detection rates and streamlining the user interface for easier management in daily operations would be beneficial improvements."

"The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information."

"The solution should implement AI in the product."

"Making the dashboards a bit modern to make them easier to search would also be helpful."

"The initial deployment was quite complicated."

"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."

More BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity cons

"They're in the process of pulling more things together. They can continue with the integrations and provide a better way of seeing the impact of security changes, especially on the endpoint side. Before we actually flip the switch, we should be able to see the impact of security changes on the business or business applications. It would prevent breaking any business applications."

"We have had issues where the urgency level of the Microsoft support is not as high as ours, especially during a data breach or potential data breach situation."

"I miss having an executive dashboard or a simple view for viewing things. Everything is extensive in this solution. Everything is configurable and manageable, but the environment of Microsoft 365 has about 13 administrative dashboards, and in each of the dashboards, there are a gazillion things to set up. It is good for a large enterprise, but for a 200-seat client, you need to see 5% of that."

"In terms of the architecture of the management infrastructure, we found that other technologies are more simple. Microsoft Defender could be simpler too."

"I would like to see integrations with other products, such as Spunk and other CM solutions. That would create possibilities for me, and for a SOC, to consolidate all events in an older console, not one provided by Microsoft but provided by a third party, and use it to create more insights."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can have more options and more AI capabilities in the future, because everything keeps changing."

"It makes your Surface devices hot. It is resource-intensive. It strains your CPU, not more than other file scanners around, but it also does a lot more. When you are transmitting files or data, it is continuously scanning the traffic and analyzing it bit by bit to see what's going on, and that, of course, is costly in terms of CPU. It is CPU intensive, and if you are on battery, it drains your battery fast. That's the only drawback that it has."

"I would like the solution to be able to prevent unauthorized programs from installing and to block unauthorised URLs which is similar to web filtering product."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is moderate."

"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."

"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."

"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."

"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."

"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."

"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years."

"The license price for this solution could be better. It's on the expensive side."

"Do not get hung up on price. You pay for what you get and expensive will hurt one time, where cheap will hurt forever, especially if you fall victim to a ransom attack, etc."

"We went through a third party initially to do the renewal, but we won't be renewing, we will move on to something else."

"It is expensive, but not unreasonable."

"Our licensing cost for the solution is around $4,000 for six months. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."

"The solution provides me with competitive pricing."

More BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity pricing and cost advice

"Everybody would like to see a lower price on everything. The Slovenian market is basically an SME market with clients having up to 100 seat licenses, comprising 90% of the company. They're very price sensitive. So, the price could be cheaper."

"This is an expensive product and licensing for all Microsoft products is a big issue."

"This solution is part of an enterprise license we have."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes with Windows 10, and it's free. But for you to be able to manage it in the cloud and use the console, you need to have either an Office 365 E5 subscription or a Microsoft M365 subscription. You need to buy an extra license."

"They are now doing it on an endpoint basis. It is based on the number of endpoints, which is good."

"The cost is high for E5 licenses, but if we go with the E3 license, most of the features are not covered."

"There is an annual license required."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is an expensive solution."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Comms Service Provider

14%

Outsourcing Company

12%

Construction Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Outsourcing Company

12%

Construction Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	50
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	57

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	33
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	82
Midsize Enterprise	44
Large Enterprise	97

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...

See all answers

Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...

See all answers

How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?

We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior sol...

See all answers

How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?

The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never pu...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

We have been discussing pricing, setup cost, and licensing, and we are currently on an E3. We are discussing going to...

See all answers

Comparisons

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity

Compared 8% of the time

VMware Carbon Black Endpoint vs BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity

Compared 8% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity

Compared 7% of the time

Intercept X Endpoint vs BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity

Compared 7% of the time

More BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity Competitors

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 7% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

HP Wolf Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

October 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity

October 2026

Download BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

October 2026

Download Microsoft Defender for Endpoint product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

Blackberry Protect

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Palo Alto Networks

Demo not available

BlackBerry

Microsoft

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity leverages AI and machine learning for efficient malware detection and zero-day threat protection, offering robust endpoint security with high detection accuracy and low false positive rates.

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity delivers advanced threat protection with AI-driven algorithms and machine learning. Its lightweight design ensures low system resource usage, making it both efficient and effective. It's recognized for centralized management, easy deployment, and a clean interface, providing comprehensive endpoint protection against diverse threats. The integration of features like CylanceOPTICS and behavioral monitoring enhances security insights. While the system excels in malware detection, enhancements are needed in areas like user interface design, reporting, deeper threat analysis, and integration with third-party systems. Support and pricing improvements could also increase competitiveness.

What are the key features of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity?

AI and Machine Learning: Utilizes cutting-edge technology for malware and threat detection.
Zero-Day Protection: Safeguards against emerging threats without the need for constant updates.
Centralized Management: Simplifies deployment and management across devices.
CylanceOPTICS: Provides advanced security insights and behavioral monitoring.
Low Resource Usage: Ensures efficient operation with minimal system impact.

What benefits should users expect from BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity?

High Detection Accuracy: Reduces risk with minimal false positives.
Efficient Resource Management: Enhances performance with its lightweight design.
Proactive Threat Defense: Protects against a wide range of threats with centralized management.
Advanced Insights: Offers unique features for detailed security analysis.

Organizations deploy BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity for threat analytics, log management, and endpoint protection. As an antivirus replacement, it protects against zero-day malware, ransomware, and various threats. Its AI algorithms detect anomalies, minimizing risks in both internet-connected and isolated environments. Many businesses incorporate it into wider security strategies, appreciating its centralized management and proactive defense capabilities.

BlackBerry

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides comprehensive threat protection that integrates well with current systems, offering proactive threat detection and automatic updates while reducing manual efforts.

The platform is designed for seamless integration with Microsoft products, facilitating efficient management and use. It offers proactive ransomware protection and valuable threat intelligence, crucial for timely response and increased visibility across devices. Users highlight its ability to secure endpoints from viruses and malware, integrating with Windows and Office 365 to enhance real-time detection capabilities in diverse environments, including hybrid and on-premises setups. However, enhancements are needed in Linux integration, detection accuracy, and policy implementations.

What are the key features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

Seamless Integration: Works smoothly with existing systems and Microsoft products for easy management.
Proactive Threat Detection: Advanced monitoring to identify and mitigate threats swiftly.
Ransomware Protection: Built-in features to protect against ransomware attacks automatically.
Centralized Management: Unified platform for better device visibility and collaboration.
Threat Intelligence: Provides critical data for rapid threat response.

What benefits should be evaluated in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

Cost-Effectiveness: Part of Windows bundles, offering comprehensive security at competitive pricing.
Time Efficiency: Reduces manual oversight with automatic updates and management ease.
Real-Time Detection: Enhanced security through seamless Office 365 and Windows integration.
Device Coverage: Supports hybrid and on-premises environments for varied digital infrastructures.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is implemented across industries for securing endpoints, relying on its deep integration with Windows and Office 365 to protect against malware and viruses. Organizations benefit from its real-time detection and comprehensive management capabilities, particularly in hybrid environments where diverse digital infrastructures need safeguarding.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health

Buyer's Guide

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

September 2026

Free Report: BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint 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.