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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Logpoint 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

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
Logpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
43rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (38th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (30th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (11th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 0.9%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Logpoint is 0.3%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

AtulChaurasia - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with intuitive features for detecting malicious files
The initial setup process is straightforward. We have to install the agent, create a package, and deploy it on servers. It has a prebuilt console managed by the cloud team of Cybereason. We don't have to worry about the console and concentrate on endpoint implementation. It takes ten days to deploy it on 10,000 devices.
Abdullah Secca - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable monitoring and integration features boost compliance
They are not in the US market, and the quality of support has declined. They migrated operations from Boston to Denmark, and we cannot use a tool hosted outside the country. Additionally, dealing with foreign entities for support was a challenge, leading us to switch providers due to lack of adequate support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is efficient."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of LogPoint is that they have the SIEM and SOAR combined in one solution. They are not on a separate platform."
"The UEBA component, as well as the SOAR component, are some of the most valuable features of Logpoint."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"The search feature is valuable. The dashboards are also valuable for our bosses. Another valuable feature, which is the main feature of the product, is the centralization of all the logs."
"The most beneficial was being able to prove, with proper reports, that from a compliance perspective, the company is in control. The service part of LogPoint did modifications or did some additional work to have the proper reports defined."
"The solution's user interface is quite simple, and the integration is better than other products."
"Log collection, dashboards and reporting are good."
 

Cons

"It initially took some time to deploy."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"The solution should offer more integrations and third-party solutions like incident response platforms or allow access to third-party big data"
"LogPoint must find a way to integrate the servers without agents."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"The general public wasn't looking for that type of product unless you had a company that was medical or financial and needed 24-hour responsiveness."
"The documentation part is something that needs to be improved, as well as the threat intelligence investigation part."
"The thing that makes it a little bit challenging is when you run into a situation where you have logs that are not easily parsable. If a log has a very specific structure, it is very easy to parse and create a parser for it, but if a log has a free form, meaning that it is of any length or it can change at any time, handling such a log is very challenging, not just in LogPoint but also in everything else. Everybody struggles with that scenario, and LogPoint is also in the same boat. One-third of logs are of free form or not of a specific length, and you can run into situations where it is almost impossible to parse the log, even if they try to help you. It is just the nature of the beast."
"I would rate the stability of Logpoint as a six out of ten. I have received reports indicating glitches and downtimes with Logpoint."
"We were missing visuals and graphics. Recently, a new version seems to have come out, and it has a new graphical user interface. When I was integrating it, it was usable, but the GUI needed improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"The pricing is manageable."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"LogPoint seemed like it was a good product, but it was expensive and there wasn't any room to move the pricing when customers needed a lower-costing solution."
"It's less expensive than the competitors. The Logpoint marketing team is very accommodating and client-friendly. They offer very good reductions in price. They are pretty good in this aspect. They are transparent in their licensing and pricing."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"Our licensing fees are about $10,000 USD per month, which I think is fair."
"My company used to pay for LogPoint costs annually. It's a cost-effective solution. I'm not part of the Finance team, though, so I'm not sure exactly what the licensing fee is or what license my company had."
"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
21%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use it to improve detection in the whole industrial sector. We are a big energy company. Across multiple endpoints, we deploy the EDR to secure all, improve detection, and also attempt to automa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
Logpoint needs to be cloud-native, as currently, it is not. Additionally, there should be compliance mapping, where the features and actions within Logpoint map to security compliance standards.
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Logpoint and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.