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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.5
Cynet users report security benefits and operational efficiencies, appreciating automation despite challenges in quantifying exact ROI figures.
Sentiment score
7.3
Deep Instinct enhances security, reduces workload and false positives, ensuring 440% ROI and productivity without expert intervention.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Cynet's customer service is praised for knowledgeable, 24/7 support, though some note room for improvement in speed and availability.
Sentiment score
7.8
Deep Instinct offers responsive, proactive technical support, with minor challenges, rated highly by customers for communication and issue resolution.
Their SOC side support, when a threat is detected, is excellent.
I was very satisfied with their technical support.
Their technical support can be improved in terms of speed when opening a ticket.
Technical support from Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is fantastic.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Cynet efficiently scales across organizations, managing 100,000+ endpoints with excellent performance, supporting diverse systems, and quick deployments.
Sentiment score
7.6
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform provides scalable and seamless endpoint expansion, supporting diverse deployment methods for medium to large organizations.
The solution is highly scalable.
Cynet is very scalable.
The solution is easy to scale.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Cynet is praised for stability and reliability, with high ratings, easy integration, and effective updates addressing minor issues.
Sentiment score
7.5
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is stable and reliable, featuring quick support for minimal issues and consistent performance improvements.
 

Room For Improvement

Cynet needs better Android support, improved integrations, enhanced automation, and a more user-friendly dashboard and administration console.
Deep Instinct needs improved control, compatibility, logging, resource efficiency, and competitive pricing for better usability and performance.
There should be more options than deploying solely through group policy, as the assumption that GPO is working isn’t always the case.
Integration with local Active Directory, not only Azure AD, is a must.
Cynet offers enough visibility into our infrastructure, showing all endpoints and other agentless devices.
 

Setup Cost

Cynet provides flexible, cost-effective licensing with comprehensive features, often considered a better value than competitors like CrowdStrike.
Deep Instinct offers competitively priced, efficient enterprise protection with nonprofit discounts, simple licensing, and included support, despite console cost concerns.
The price of Cynet is reasonable considering its features and support.
I think the pricing of Cynet is fair and one of the better options in the market.
The licensing is very competitively priced, better than all other solutions.
 

Valuable Features

Cynet offers user-friendly, advanced protection with real-time monitoring, easy deployment, competitive pricing, and comprehensive threat detection.
Deep Instinct offers accurate, lightweight malware protection with real-time, offline capabilities and seamless deployment across Windows, Mac, and Android.
Cynet was valuable since it efficiently managed MDR without consuming a lot of resources.
One of the important items is the reporting functionality.
The valuable aspects of Cynet are its EDR and XDR components, which are available at a reasonable price point.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cynet
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (10th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (3rd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (14th), Threat Deception Platforms (3rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (8th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
38th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cynet is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.7% 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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

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 of Cynet is reasonable considering its features and support.
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: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.