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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Seqrite Endpoint Security comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Microsoft Defender for Endp...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
213
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Anti-Malware Tools (1st), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (3rd)
Seqrite Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
25th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 7.8%, down from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Seqrite Endpoint Security is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint7.8%
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.5%
Seqrite Endpoint Security1.2%
Other87.5%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
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.
ManishKumar14 - PeerSpot reviewer
DGM IT at Seth Anandram Jaipuria Group of Educational Institutions
Centrally managed, easy to configure, and easy to use
Seqrite Endpoint Security protects individual machines, servers, and emails against malware, viruses, and spam attacks The solution is centrally managed, easy to configure, and easy to use. It allows you to patch your required reports. The solution provides central deployment, remote deployment,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"My advice for others looking into using Cortex is that it is very easy to use and very useful for the customer environment, whether it's a public or private one."
"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"The positive impacts I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks include a complete 360-degree view of our security posture altogether, being a uniform platform where we are ingesting logs from multiple resources."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."
"It doesn't cause the slowness of the system, which is one of the reasons why I like it."
"Defender for Endpoint is a robust solution that works well out-of-the-box."
"Defender is a part of Windows; you just need to enable it. There is no need to install anything."
"Its simplicity is the most valuable. It also has very good integration. We like it."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's WCS function, a content filtering solution, has proven to be the most useful, stable, and reliable option for our current needs."
"Defender's analytics are much better than CrowdStrike's."
"It is easy to use because it is already pre-installed in Windows 10. We don't have to do anything to configure it. You can also configure the firewall by using a group policy so that it can be easily adopted in an environment."
"The overall performance of the server and the dashboard are the most interesting aspects of the solution."
"The only thing that I have found useful is that I have an overview of my systems in the networks."
"The convenience has been great."
"The two valuable features are anti-ransomware and data loss protection."
"The most valuable feature is its endpoint protection, particularly the antivirus component. It has been very effective in protecting our clients, and since its installation, we haven't encountered any issues with compromised endpoints or virus impacts."
"The most valuable part of the solution is its ransomware backup feature."
"The most valuable features are the file activity monitors, DLP solutions, and application controls."
"The most valuable features of the solution are DLP, XDR, and EDR functionalities."
 

Cons

"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by adding a sandbox feature to better compete with their competitors which have it."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."
"If he is using a smaller company, he can depend on some other tools because Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a bit expensive."
"I think sometimes Cortex XDR agent automatically stops event capturing from the device, and then even the dashboard does not get any notifications from the agent."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"There are a large number of false positives."
"Its interface can be improved a little bit. We would like to have some sort of centralization. It should have something like a central server that is managing all the other clients. There are solutions from Kaspersky or ESET NOD32 that are really doing this kind of thing currently. We would like to see something similar from Microsoft."
"Features like device inventory continue to lack essential workstation drill-downs showing the entire device information with the least effort."
"The GUI is very complex and could be more user friendly."
"Threat intelligence has the potential for improvement, particularly by integrating more sources."
"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."
"Reporting could be improved. I would like to see how many security incidents occurred in the last six months, how many devices were highly exposed to security risks, and how many devices were actually compromised."
"I would like the solution to be able to prevent unauthorized programs from installing and to block unauthorised URLs which is similar to web filtering product."
"The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight."
"The solution needs to improve stability."
"Endpoint Security would be improved by adding DLP."
"Deployment of Seqrite Endpoint Security is generally straightforward. The only complexity we encounter is that, since it is cloud-based, there can be delays in updating the endpoint's status."
"We would like the solution to have integration with other security solutions so that we can have a single base for monitoring all the security incidents and concerns."
"In the next version, they should improve the areas of utility and centralized control."
"The solution's integration capabilities are moderate and could be improved."
"The product or service could be improved by incorporating SIEM integrations to enable the collection of logs."
"A handbook of known issues and quick fixes should be given so that troubleshooting and frustration are less."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"There is not a license required for this particular solution."
"The nice thing about Defender and Sentinel is that the cost is based on the data logs that you ingest from the Defender endpoints and data connectors. I don't have to buy a 25- or 50- or 1,000-user or enterprise license. I can buy one license at a time."
"Even if you are not registered as a not-for-profit, the offering that they have is definitely worth consideration. This is in the sense that the E5 stack just gives you so many benefits. You get your entire productivity suite through Microsoft 365 apps. You get all your security and identity protection. You get the Defender for Endpoint and Defender for Identity. You get the cloud access security broker as well. You get Azure Active Directory Premium P2, which gives you so many good things that you can configure and deploy. You don't have to configure them on day one, but you have access to so many different tools that will protect your data, security, endpoints, and identities that you could build out a security strategy 18 months long, and slowly work your way through it, based on what you have available to you through your license."
"The licensing costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are reasonable."
"The subscription is part of Windows, so we don't have to pay anything extra for this product."
"It is free."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is included with a Microsoft E5 license."
"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."
"My company needs to purchase a yearly subscription for the licensing costs for Seqrite Endpoint Security."
"The licensing fee is 200 Bangladeshi Taka per client per year."
"The license isn't expensive."
"We get the tool for around 1200 rupees for a three-year subscription. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"We pay approximately $1,500 for licenses for the solution."
"The solution's pricing is good for us, where it is neither cheap nor expensive."
"I give the cost of the solution a seven out of ten."
"You need to pay for a yearly license for Seqrite Endpoint Security, which is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business81
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise94
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
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,...
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 sol...
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 pu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?
I'm not too familiar with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint; it wasn't some...
What do you like most about Seqrite Endpoint Security?
The most valuable part of the solution is its ransomware backup feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Seqrite Endpoint Security?
The solution's pricing is good for us, where it is neither cheap nor expensive.
What needs improvement with Seqrite Endpoint Security?
The solution's integration capabilities are moderate and could be improved.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
Seqrite End Point Security, Seqrite EPS
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health
Gadre, Bharat Vikas Group, Fernandez Hospital, Fabtech Projects & Engineering, KIMS Hospital, National Steel And Agro Industries, Sardar Patel University, Sterling Wilson, Chowgule Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. Seqrite Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.