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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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 Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
210
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (3rd), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (3rd)
OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
50th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 7.8%, down from 11.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint7.8%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​1.2%
Other91.0%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
reviewer2584380 - PeerSpot reviewer
vCIO At Grove Networks Inc. at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Improving threat detection is critical for enhanced protection
We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the contract we have with our clients as a cost-effective option for antivirus protection Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is cost-effective for rolling it out to all of our clients,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that Defender is integrated and doesn't have a third-party payload trying to advertise subscription renewal."
"It's pretty easy to scale."
"One feature I like the most is vulnerability management, which shows any vulnerable software or OS present in my environment. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides a complete overview and also recommends the steps to mitigate the vulnerabilities or threats. Most of the other antivirus or EDR solutions generally don't provide vulnerability management. It is an add-on that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides."
"There are a couple of features, such as isolating the devices or connecting the device and connecting live response."
"Its threat intelligence feature is beneficial. This solution smoothly integrates with SIEM."
"Offers good protection."
"I find the vulnerability management section of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to be very useful for organizations."
"Auto-remediation: When the product sees malware, it resolves the issue immediately. This protects the machine."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"It is very lightweight on the workstations, not slowing them down while still doing its job very well."
"It is very light. It is the only solution that can be installed on a machine that already has an antivirus. It is a pretty complete solution."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."
"Their policy management, their cloud-based dashboard and user interface are very easy to navigate."
"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."
 

Cons

"Microsoft Defender in the basic form is not very useful for managing the security environment. The free version is not capable of covering the needs of centralized management, EDR, and behavioral analysis. If you don't have the commercial version, you can't have centralized management and set up the policies and other things. Each client is a standalone installation, which is not useful for security in an enterprise model."
"It needs to improve the cybersecurity for lateral movements. For example, when a hacker tries to enter a machine, they try to get the password by doing a lateral movement."
"If a threat actor comes in, and creates a global administrative account, they can gain access to everything and whitelist then block everything else. Having everything, including Defender, under one brand is like having all of your eggs in one basket."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by making the reporting better."
"There's scanning going on that occasionally topples the memory, causing everything to freeze. This should be fixed."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"What I think can be improved on Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that the whitelisting abilities are pitiful, and the understanding of how you go about doing that by the support techs that you speak with is really bad, so that I think is an area where Microsoft Defender for Endpoint needs improvement; the understanding and support of that and what actually works is pretty buggy."
"Regarding the pricing of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, during the last three years, we set up the product and sold it, but we faced difficulties because Microsoft pricing is always the same."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."
"We need more control over when upgrades to the app are rolled out."
"They should provide more information on the type of cyber attacks."
"Their customer support should be better. We started having some issues with it, and we didn't get the required support."
"It would be great if there was a feature which would allow you to scan an individual file on an endpoint user's computer."
"We need to know more details about how the virus interacted with the computer."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licenses depend upon what you are looking for and what kind of security do you want to implement. There are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. When we used to buy Symantec, we used to spend on 100 licenses. We used to spend approximately $2,700 for those many licenses, and they came in packs. To add one more license, I had to buy a pack with a minimum of 10 licenses. I had to spend on nine extra licenses because I can't get a single license, whereas when we go for Microsoft, we can get as many licenses as we want. If I have 100 users today, and tomorrow, I have 90 users, I can release my 10 licenses next month. With any other software vendor, you buy licenses for one year, and you have to stick with that. If today you have 100 licenses, and tomorrow, you have 50, you have already paid for one year's license. You can't go back and tell them that I don't require these 50 licenses because I have lost my 50 users, but with Microsoft Defender, licensing is on a monthly basis. It gives you both options. You can go yearly and save on it, or you can go monthly. You will, again, save on it. It is very fair everywhere."
"Buying individual point products would've cost us a lot more money than one integrated solution that also capitalizes on Teams Voice and things of that nature. Given our size, buying individual products would have easily cost us a million dollars."
"There is an annual license required."
"It is affordable and comes in the Office 365 bundle."
"Microsoft Defender is an expensive product in my country."
"For most people, the price of the license is not something that they have to worry about."
"The normal, standalone model, is not expensive, but the enterprise model that includes the bundle with email and some web protection, is a bit more expensive."
"This solution is part of Windows and comes included with it."
"The solution is very cost-effective."
"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."
"Our strategy was to overestimate the complexity and cost. It turned out that Webroot's assurance was justified."
"It is relatively cheap."
"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."
"The pricing is high."
"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Performing Arts
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business80
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise92
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business35
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.
What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.
What is your primary use case for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the contract we have with our clients as a cost-effective option for antivirus protection.
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Mytech Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.