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

Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 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 Next-Generation ...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Anti-Malware Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
197
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (1st), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Anti-Malware Tools category, the mindshare of Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus is 0.3%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 15.6%, down from 21.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Anti-Malware Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Peter Nowak - PeerSpot reviewer
Cross-platform capability enhances security integration
The single agent, combined with the EDR system, delivers additional information and data for the EDR. Regarding the use cases, or maybe it fits better into another question about the motivation of the customers, I can see two approaches. The first approach is where the customer has an existing EDR system running, and their contract comes to an end. They are looking to either prolong it, renew it, continue with the current system, or look for something cheaper or better. When they reevaluate the contract, it's a sales approach to suggest that for a similar amount of money, not very much more, they can get something much better. It's not only a plain EDR or plain antivirus system - it's antivirus plus EDR. The difference in price is not much. Especially for the antivirus, the cross-platform capability is significant, as it's for Windows and Linux workstations and servers. Having one system for all platforms is essential. This has helped in two ways. The majority of customers want one thing for all, however, some customers definitely want two systems, servers separated from workstations. I have a big data center for banks, and they separate Windows Servers from Linux Servers. It is important for them to have two different systems. By providing this multi-operating system capability, I have engaged with customers via the Linux servers because the Windows servers are handled differently, so they were looking for a second different system, which opened the door for us.
Sudhen Swami - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to update with good protection and a useful cloud portal
We've mainly used it for endpoints. However, we've also used it for DLP as well. We're also in the process of implementing it for cloud and identity as well. However, it's very good for endpoints, and that's our main focus. The malware protection is good. The visibility it provides is very useful. We can combine visibility with wider security features and alerts around malware, misconfiguration, or any other kinds of threats. The cloud portal is quite good. From there, we are able to see alerts and have colleagues review issues and monitor to see if any patterns arise. It's serving us quite well overall. It allows us to look at other items, like application and browser control. It helps us prioritize threats. We have a process in place now where we can review issues and remediate them effectively. We have been able to integrate a variety of Microsoft security products together. We use Azure AD, for example, and we've begun to implement DLP, among other items. We're looking at labeling and tagging and will expand into that soon. Defender has more stringent system requirements than, for example, Check Point. So when we implemented the Check Point Endpoint agent, that solution didn't mind what version of Windows you were using. When we moved to Defender, Defender had certain system prerequisites that had to be met. So we had to make sure that we're on a minimum version of Windows when we're utilizing Office, and Office has to be a particular version as well. It has more stringent system requirements that have to be met before you can implement it. It works natively together with other Microsoft solutions. Once you get more and more of those different components across the environment, then you start to get better visibility. So, rather than having lots of different solutions, you have fewer solutions and a single vendor solution. That way, you start getting into a position where you get better visibility and integration as well. The standardization is good. It's important. It's helping me with monitoring and learning. Updates and upgrades are quite smooth and seamless. Defender helps us automate routine tasks. Quite a lot of Microsoft is straightforward for us now. Previously, we didn't have enough resources and were unable to look at the alerts. Having this in place makes things a lot more straightforward for us. We have both the technology and the people in place now, alongside the process. We do see the benefits in that, and that's why we're continuing our adoption across the estate in terms of client and server as well. It's helping us avoid looking at multiple dashboards and centralized monitoring. We're not fully there yet. We're getting there. While we haven't witnessed time saving yet, once it's fully deployed, it will. By then, we'll have standardized processes across a single solution. We have saved money, however, as we continue to reduce non-Mircosft systems. Since we won't be using various competing technologies, we can save on licensing costs. We've likely so far saved 15%. While it's hard to estimate exactly how much, the solution has helped us decrease time to detection and time to respond.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's most valuable feature is its AI detection algorithm part, which helps and is Cybereason's way of detecting the unknown, not just the signature-based threats."
"The tool's detection range works fine. Its most valuable features are its ease of employment and lightweightness. It's not heavy on resources. We focus on malware and ransomware detection."
"I would rate the overall product as an eight out of ten."
"Especially for the antivirus, the cross-platform capability is significant, as it's for Windows and Linux workstations and servers."
"You can query and access useful information from logs and events, which is powerful and efficient."
"This solution definitely increases our security posture. When you are reviewing your existing fleet or endpoints and based on the configuration that you put out of your Defender for Endpoint, you then receive a security score from Microsoft. Depending on what rules you have configured, what policies you have deployed, and what attack surface reduction rules that you have set up and deployed, it is almost gamifying information security in the sense that you are always trying to achieve a higher score. The more hardening you perform on your endpoints, the better score you receive. This generally tends to give you a better peace of mind, but also makes you secure at the same time."
"The virus scanning capability is excellent, and it feeds all the logs into the Microsoft 365 Defender portal, making them easy to search for."
"The most valuable features are that it is flexible, and it is integrated with Microsoft products."
"The solution's latest features for threat analysis are updated to provide us with future protection against the latest threats worldwide."
"I like the fact that it has the ransomware solution in there. I'm glad that the ransomware solution is built into it. That's probably the biggest thing that I see in Microsoft Defender."
"Defender has very little impact on the end-user and the agent works quite well with a minimal impact on the client and server."
"It is quite stable. We have not had any cases, i.e., viruses, that would require a reboot, etc. We have never had a situation where we needed to reinstall the tools as a result of the Defender application or a feature being corrupt."
 

Cons

"Integrating other tools is sometimes an issue when using Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus."
"Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus is not available in the local language, which can be inconvenient."
"I have been told several times that the stability of the sensor, not the back end, is an issue."
"I have been told several times that the stability of the sensor, not the back end, is an issue."
"The solution needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should have more transparency. In the latest edition of Windows, Windows 11, it is a compulsory requirement to connect to a Microsoft account, which in turn has implications for Defender. This should be removed."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint does not provide much flexibility in terms of threats."
"The reporting in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve. The solution has limited features."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint does not offer default templates for alerts, requiring us to configure everything ourselves to avoid numerous false positives."
"The price, in general, could always be a little bit cheaper."
"With increase of cyber threats and cybersecurity issues, I would recommend that the product be developed like an AI product with more features which can counter any threat in the coming eras."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing a four out of ten. Its pricing is justified."
"For most people, the price of the license is not something that they have to worry about."
"Licensing models of Microsoft are renowned for being complex. We just purchased the whole E5 stack. With E5 licenses for users, we get access to a bunch of features that are not just related to security. I would rate them a three out of five in terms of pricing."
"The solution is free and comes with Windows."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is cost-effective because there's one unified license, and with this unified license, you get the capabilities for your cloud applications, servers, and endpoints as well. Therefore, it saves us a lot of money because the cost with other solutions is for just one piece of OS or maybe an urban environment. The licensing process is not complex as well."
"I pay for it through the Windows Professional or Standard license. It is a one-time cost for me, and I use the same license."
"Currently, for us, Windows Defender is free with the purchase of Windows Server. Pricing is an important point for us when we are looking at the competitors of this solution. If we choose to go with another vendor, we will have to pay some license fees."
"If you don't purchase the advanced threat protection then there is no additional charge."
"It is affordable and comes in the Office 365 bundle."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Anti-Malware Tools 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%
Performing Arts
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
The solution's most valuable feature is its AI detection algorithm part, which helps and is Cybereason's way of detecting the unknown, not just the signature-based threats.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
I rate the solution's pricing a four out of ten. Its pricing is justified.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus?
I have been told several times that the stability of the sensor, not the back end, is an issue. After certain updates, it consumes too much processor time without utilizing the processor capacity e...
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, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
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...
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 push your machine hardware to "test", you don't have the usual "scan now" feature ...
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CONNECTICUT WATER, BEAM SUNTORY, CADWALADER, WICKERSHAM & TAFT, RTI Surgical, HOSPITAL REVENUE CYCLE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, MCBEE ASSOCIATES, FORTUNE 500 BANK
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Next-Generation Antivirus vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.