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

Cynet vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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

Cynet
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (12th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (5th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (14th), Threat Deception Platforms (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (9th), Ransomware Protection (6th)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cynet is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Zubair Ahmad - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed threat detection efficiently with minimal resource usage
We used the solution as a Managed Detection and Response (MDR) service. It detected threats, and the team managing our services took care of it. We did not face any major challenges or attacks, and memory utilization was minimal. It functioned very well Cynet was valuable since it efficiently…
Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Advanced detection and protection against ransomware paired with SOC monitoring are the most valuable features. They have 24/7 SOC monitoring and file activity. It is a very robust tool."
"For overall satisfaction, I rate Cynet between nine to ten out of ten, and I wholeheartedly recommend it to other users."
"It is quite stable. I would rate the stability of the solution a nine out of ten."
"My clients have used Cynet since it is a very automated solution with excellent detection capabilities."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is a complete solution, which makes cyber security very free and almost perfect. There is no such thing as perfect cyber security, but as far as it can go, sign it comes close to being perfect and holistic. Cynet is always comprehensive from the perspective of functionality, as well as from the standpoint that it encompasses not only technology but also processes and people. The triad of people, processes, and technology is crucial and should always be in place. To my knowledge, no other product or platform combines all three components into one, but Cynet does."
"We are protecting all our workstations."
"It is a very stable solution...It is a very scalable solution...The initial setup of Cynet was easy."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that the configuration and the usage of the product are not so complicated. For people responsible for using this infrastructure for the first line of workstation monitoring, it's quite easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"The support is very good. They reply and respond very quickly."
"The most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"Deep Instinct complements the solutions we already have. You don't need to rip and replace any antivirus or endpoint that you have. It's easy to use and it's easy to have it side-by-side with other solutions. That makes it really easy to have an additional level of protection, rather than to hassle with doing solution migration."
"Instead of having features like rollback and after-event actionable stuff, the whole premise and the context of the solution is to actually prevent these malicious attacks from happening to begin with.... The ability to prevent threats is the most appealing aspect. It absolutely, 100 percent helps with real-time prevention of unknown malware. That's the strength of the product."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement in terms of support. The support should be faster to respond."
"Cynet could improve when a reverse proxy is being used to connect to the servers. There could be an easier configuration because it is not plug-and-play."
"They have automated response capability, and they're moving more and more into SOAR capability. They have built-in deception technology with host-file users, phantoms, etc. We used to call them honeypots. So, they're on target. They're doing a really good job, and they should continue to improve with SOAR."
"The solution lacks URL filtering."
"Their technical support can be improved in terms of speed when opening a ticket."
"Their support for issues related to the portal or feature problems isn't great."
"Linux servers are not supported."
"The command line interface could be improved."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"I would like a little more training for the admins."
"They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"Reporting on incidents needs improvement."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Everything is included in this one solution and the pricing is pretty competitive."
"Cynet is very affordable."
"Our billing is on a quarterly basis, but they have monthly or annual billing availability."
"it's not cheap, but I would rate it a three out of ten. If one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The price is very competitive."
"It gives you a high level of protection at a very good price."
"My company's customers have to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the solution. Cynet is not expensive."
"This solution is expensive. I would rate the price as a three out of five when compared to similar products."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"One thing about their licensing program that I like is that just one covers the server as well as on the endpoint as well as mobile devices. There is no complexity in calculating how many SKUs I need for mobile, for laptop, for desktop, and for servers. It's very simple and that makes it much easier to budget."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
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
16%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

When evaluating User Activity Monitoring, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
The support team that stands behind the detection and response. Is there adequate expertise and are they behind you 24x7x365? Cynet CyOps has been there for us.
What do you like most about Cynet?
In terms of incident response, Cynet can contain attacks, offer a trial period to customers, and uninstall if not continued. The most valuable aspect is its integration capabilities, covering endpo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cynet?
The price is competitive, so I cannot complain about it.
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Meuhedet, East Boston Neighborhood Health Center
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cynet vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.