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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection 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:
 

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)
WithSecure Elements Endpoin...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
51st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
7
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 WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is 0.6%, down from 0.7% 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.
Muhammed Abdul Gafoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Has an easy initial setup process, but there could be more integration options
The initial setup is easy. I rate the process a seven or eight out of ten. We have LPR procurement. The deployment involves installing the product and adding a license. It takes three to four days to complete and requires a team of less than ten people to execute the process.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It used to take us a month to find out that something is infected, we now know that same day, as soon it is infected."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"With Cisco Secure Endpoint, we now have visibility over what is happening on the endpoint side."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
 

Cons

"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"The integration of the Cisco products for security could be better in the sense that not everything is integrated, and they aren't working together. In addition, not all products are multi-tenant, so you can't separate different customer environments from each other, which makes it a little bit hard for a managed service provider to deliver services to the customers."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company does make annual payments towards the licensing costs of the solution. Cisco Secure Endpoint is a little bit expensive."
"It can always be cheaper."
"The price is very good."
"Cisco's pricing is reasonable. We also do not need to opt for niche players, which would have charged us significantly more than Cisco for ecosystem solutions. We are highly satisfied with the pricing structure of Cisco's solutions they are reasonable."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"Cisco Secure Endpoint is not too expensive and it's not cheap. It's quite fair."
"The solution is highly affordable; I believe we pay $2 or $3 per endpoint. It's significantly cheaper than the competitors on the market."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"The price is comparable."
"The cost of the solution depends on the size of the company and where the licenses are being ordered from."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee of about €20 per computer."
"The product has average pricing."
"If you purchase licenses in bulk the price of the licenses can decrease."
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
17%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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...
What do you like most about F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
The notifications and patch management features are valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
The price is comparable. We do not have a problem with the pricing. I rate the pricing a five or six out of ten. There are no additional costs associated with the solution.
What needs improvement with F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
The product does not have technical partners in the Middle East. It only has sales partners. I do not like the sales partners in UAE. They did not support me when I needed help with security. The v...
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection, F-Secure Protection Service for Business
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.