Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Symantec Endpoint Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Cisco Secure Endpoint enhances productivity and reduces costs by streamlining threat detection, integrating tools, and minimizing manual intervention.
Sentiment score
7.5
Symantec Endpoint Security provides cost-effective protection, reducing downtime and boosting reputation with high detection rates and automated processes.
Symantec Endpoint Security filled gaps in our toolset, particularly with the ability to control network firewall on hosts remotely, which was greatly appreciated.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.1
Cisco Secure Endpoint support is praised for responsiveness and expertise, providing quick issue resolution and valuable user guidance.
Sentiment score
7.2
Symantec Endpoint Security's customer service is praised but has varied feedback, citing slower response since Broadcom's takeover.
Cisco has good technical support, especially considering these are newer solutions compared to traditional routing and switching products.
In some cases, it rates as high as ten out of ten, while in others, it can be as low as eight.
There is no support in the German language, which is a problem for many public tenders.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Cisco Secure Endpoint is scalable, integrates with SecureX for efficient management, and supports diverse industries without extra resources.
Sentiment score
7.8
Symantec Endpoint Security is highly scalable and adaptable for diverse industries, though smaller deployments may face complexity.
Cisco Secure Endpoint is definitely scalable.
Symantec Endpoint Security is quite scalable, and it is very important for large clients.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is highly stable, reliable, and trusted for performance, earning high ratings from users in various enterprises.
Sentiment score
7.8
Symantec Endpoint Security is generally stable and reliable, despite occasional update issues and concerns post-Broadcom acquisition.
We have not encountered any problems.
I have encountered issues where I had to uninstall and reinstall the product on end users' computers to view the logs again.
 

Room For Improvement

Cisco Secure Endpoint requires better integration, reporting, and UI enhancements, alongside improved pricing, AI capabilities, and IoT support.
Symantec Endpoint Security needs better detection, lower resource use, simpler management, improved support, and competitive pricing for broader adoption.
The forensic capabilities need enhancement, especially for deep forensic data collection.
It is cumbersome to use, particularly in handling firewall management.
Device management is not very good and I am not enabling it in my organization due to security reasons.
I would like to see improvements in the scanning part of the solution, specifically to enhance the CPU and hard disk usage during scanning and updates to prevent disruption during work hours.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco Secure Endpoint offers competitive and flexible pricing with value-rich features, despite some complexity in licensing.
Symantec Endpoint Security is priced reasonably but higher, with value appreciated; discounts and licensing structures affect overall costs.
Cisco is aggressive in pricing, making it competitive and sometimes even cheaper than other good products like CrowdStrike, Microsoft Defender, or SentinelOne.
It seems to be half the cost or more affordable than other solutions.
I rate the pricing, setup cost, and licensing around nine out of ten.
Symantec Endpoint Protection and Symantec Endpoint Security Enterprise are quite affordable, with Symantec Endpoint Security Complete costing about four times the Endpoint Protection price, still comparable to other EDR products.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced security features, cross-platform support, and ease of use with strong threat intelligence and support.
Symantec Endpoint Security provides comprehensive threat protection and easy management, supporting multiple platforms with real-time updates and scalability.
Cisco Secure Endpoint is very good in machine learning, which allows it to secure offline contents even if not connected to the internet.
One important feature is the EDR function, necessary for many public customers due to upcoming laws in Germany, which is available through Symantec Endpoint Security Complete.
The incident response capabilities allow me to resolve authentication and support issues promptly, ensuring the system operates without downtime.
A valuable feature of Symantec Endpoint Security is the ability to remotely isolate a computer from the network if it's compromised, either physically or digitally.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (12th), Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
Symantec Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
144
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Endpoint Security is 4.0%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mark Broughton - PeerSpot reviewer
Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information
We were using a third-party help desk. One of the ways that they were fixing problems was to delete the client and then add the client back if there was an issue where the client had stopped communicating. Any improvement in the client communicating back to the server would be good, particularly for machines that are offline for a couple of weeks. A lot of our guys were working on a rotation where the machine might be offline for that long. They were also terrible about rebooting their machines, so those network connections didn't necessarily get refreshed. So, anything that could improve that communication would be good. Also, an easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful. If you could say, "Okay, we've got these two machines. This one says it's not reporting and this one says it's been reporting. Obviously, somebody did a reinstall," it would help. That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number. Not that Cisco was going to come down on you and say, "Oh, you're using too many licenses," right away. But to have a much more accurate license usage count by being able to better dedupe the records would be good. I also sent over a couple of other ideas to our technical rep. A lot of that had to do with the reporting options. It would be really nice to be able to do a lot more in the reporting. You can't really drill down into the reports that are there. The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint. Also, there was one section when I was playing with the automation where it was asking for the endpoint type rather than the machine name. If I could have just put in the machine name, that would have been great. So there are some opportunities, when it comes to searching, to have more options. If I wanted to search, for example, by a Mac address because, for some reason, I thought there was a duplication and I didn't have the machine name, how could I pull it up with the Mac address? When you're getting to that level, you're really starting to get into the ticky tacky. I would definitely put the reporting and documentation way ahead of that.
Hakeem_Abdulkareem - PeerSpot reviewer
The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated
Symantec's application security module needs some improvement. You need to create a lot of fingerprints for application security. For instance, let's say I have different brands of ATMs in my environment, like Wincor and NCR. I use GRG to deploy an application control to whitelist some applications. I have to get the exact image of the different models of ATMs. When I tested in the past, some machines would not connect to the server without that. Only the approved software on the ATM should run. Anything outside that should not even come up at all. We did this so that an outside person doesn't introduce malicious software to the ATM. That's the essence of locking down with application control. Using Symantec for application control has been hectic, so I use Carbon Black to do the lockdown. Checking that data security will work fine with Carbon Black. Carbon Black worked fine. Setting up approval in Carbon Black works differently than Symantec. In Symantec, we first need the fingerprints of the applications running underneath. Before setting up Carbon Black, you first install the agent, allowing it to learn the environment. It will analyze all the software's behavior and provide recommendations for what should be allowed. It's more straightforward, whereas configuring application control in Symantec is a bit cumbersome.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
I am not entirely sure about the exact licensing cost. It ranges from 2,000 to 2,500 INR annually.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Previously, there were options to uninstall the agent without a password if you had admin access, and this could be improved. It may require a password for uninstalling clients, which would be help...
Which is better - Cortex XDR or Symantec End-User Endpoint Security?
Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very valuable feature and their speed of integration is very good. The initial setup was ...
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 solution. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security s...
What do you like most about Symantec End-User Endpoint Security?
Symantec have everything – documentation, videos, data sheets.
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Symantec EPP, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Audio Visual Dynamics, Red Deer Advocate, Asia Pacific Telecom Co. Ltd., Kibbutz Ein Gedi, and AMETEK, Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.