No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
212
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (2nd), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (6th), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (3rd), Agentic Endpoint Security (3rd)
Microsoft Purview Communica...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
32nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
GRC (16th), Digital Risk Protection (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 6.0%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is 1.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint6.0%
Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance1.6%
Other92.4%
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Robert Arbuckle - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Analyst III at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Automatically isolates threats and integrates with logging to reduce response time
Overall, I would evaluate the Microsoft support level that I receive at probably about a seven, but that depends on the day. It has been spotty. We have had issues where the urgency level of the Microsoft support is not as high as ours, especially during a data breach or potential data breach situation. We have had issues with some of the offshore support being lackluster. One specific thing that comes to mind is we were on a support call with our CISO on the call, and the Microsoft agent, who did not actually work for Microsoft, is one of the vendors that Microsoft uses for support, said, "Just to set expectations, my lunch break is in an hour and I am going to go away then." For us, it was already ten o'clock at night and we had been working on this for a couple of hours, trying to get a security engineer on with us. For him to tell us that he was going to go away and have lunch, it was, "Okay, but go find somebody else if you need to." It was just the lackluster approach, and it seemed like he did not really care. We seem to get a lot of this when we get non-Microsoft support. I can identify areas for improvement with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, as it is kind of a convoluted mess to try to take care of false positives. Especially when they have been identified as false positives but they keep going off over and over again. It is great for my pocketbook because it generates a lot of on-call action, but I would really prefer more sleep at two o'clock in the morning than dealing with false positives. I would say that the unified portal for managing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is suitable for both teams as they are all in there. It would be great if they would stop moving things around and renaming things, which makes sense. The new XDR portal is pretty nice. Being able to have it central again inside of the regular Security Center without having to open up two windows is helpful. Overall, I think it is pretty good. There is always going to be something that could be improved, such as alerting and the ability to modify alerts would be a little bit helpful to have. Being able to add more data into the alerts and turn off alerts that are not as useful would be beneficial. It is hard to say what the quantitative impact the security exposure management feature has had on our company's security, because a lot of it is kind of subjective. I think we are sitting at around a fifty percent score still, and a lot of it is just kind of unusual circumstances that we cannot really implement without breaking the organization.
reviewer2840445 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Engineering Senior Specialist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Data lineage and quality checks have streamlined team-wide collaboration and business context
The biggest friction point or frustration I have encountered with Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is cost-wise it is acceptable, but sometimes unexpected errors will occur, though this happens very rarely. There are features I wish Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance had that it does not provide today. Enterprise-level lineage is one such feature. As of now, if Microsoft were to provide this tool for free when you buy Microsoft Fabric, I feel that would be better. This would also result in lower license costs. I do not have any changes I would make to Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance at this time.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The biggest benefit to Windows Defender is that it is built-in to the operating system by Microsoft."
"Defender for Endpoint has significantly reduced our SOC team's workload by automating threat detection and response, allowing them to focus on other critical projects."
"Integration between Microsoft products is very easy."
"I like the process visibility. This ability to visualize how something was executed is valuable, and the fact that Defender ATP is also linked to the threat intelligence that they have is also valuable. So, even if you have something that doesn't have a conventional signature, the fact that you get this strange execution means that you can detect things that are normally not visible."
"The feature I appreciate most about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is the portal, being able to see everything rolling up into the portal for a total overview of how the organization looks for all the managed endpoints."
"The solution can scale as needed."
"You can query and access useful information from logs and events, which is powerful and efficient."
"Microsoft is more integrated, more comprehensive, and Defender is part of the Microsoft operating system."
"The time it saves is very useful."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance helps with extra collaboration and ensures communication is within the framework."
"The features I appreciate the most in Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance include the ability to build cases, give them dates, and find them based on the notes that I left behind."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance has impacted my organization positively; it is a good tool that provides an end-to-end business view for a particular organization."
"Customer support is excellent."
 

Cons

"I would like to have additional features such as DNS lookup, which would help for detecting malicious sites."
"I would like to see integrations with other products, such as Spunk and other CM solutions."
"Its price could be better."
"Microsoft Defender could be improved with features more like the McAfee ePO. It would be better if I had a console to get all the information for my endpoints. Maybe this is too much for it, but it would be better if it could handle those non-signature-based malicious codes or viruses."
"It has not yet saved any time. It has only consumed my time for now because I need to learn and do the training and PoCs, but it is an investment for the future."
"Sometimes it's complicated. It's not intuitive in terms of installation and deployment."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by making the reporting better."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"The product should incorporate more automation with the help of AI."
"The biggest friction point or frustration I have encountered with Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is cost-wise it is acceptable, but sometimes unexpected errors will occur, though this happens very rarely."
"Monitoring and compliance for web applications could be improved."
"Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance can be improved by having more tutorials available for those who aren't used to using this platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They are now doing it on an endpoint basis. It is based on the number of endpoints, which is good."
"There is no licensing fee."
"The base price for an E5 license, which includes Enterprise Mobility + Security E5, is $57 per user per month."
"The E5 license is the one that I recommend because it comes with Cloud App Security, which is a good thing to have on top of Microsoft Defender."
"For most people, the price of the license is not something that they have to worry about."
"This product is included in the pricing for Windows."
"I do not have to purchase antivirus solutions anymore because Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is integrated into Windows and comes free."
"We went for Microsoft Defender once we were informed that it would be part of our Office 365 package. So, we combined the licensing for the OS with Office 365. Yeah. We thought it was a good bargain."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business82
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise97
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
The biggest friction point or frustration I have encountered with Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is cost-wise it is acceptable, but sometimes unexpected errors will occur, though this h...
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
The scope of Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is a team-wide workflow. The first thing I do when I open Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is check how many workspaces are availab...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance?
Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance is a bit expensive, $500 per license, but it is cheaper compared to products like ComplyAd, GeoComply, and ComplyAdvantage.
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Microsoft Purview Communication Compliance and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.