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

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection 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

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)
WithSecure Elements Endpoin...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
42nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
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 WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is 1.0%, 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%
WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection1.0%
Other91.2%
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.
Mark Feldman - PeerSpot reviewer
IT-Manager at MKF-Schimanski-ERGIS GmbH
Central console streamlines patch monitoring and device management effortlessly
WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is good and easy to set up. I provide an installation file for every client through my domain controller and GPO, and it works properly. We have faced no incidents with viruses or network breaches, and it's easy to monitor patches. I can use remote desktop from the central console. The solution also saves my time because, being the only one handling it, I can monitor all devices easily.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform."
"It's stable."
"The most valuable features are that it is flexible, and it is integrated with Microsoft products."
"The whole bundle of the product, which is similar to other Microsoft products, is valuable. Ten years ago, you had third-party stuff for different things. You had one solution for email archiving and another third-party one for something else. Nowadays, Microsoft Office covers all the stuff that was formerly covered by third-party solutions. It is the same with antivirus. The functionality is just basic. You have the scanning, and then you also have a kind of cloud-based protection and reporting about your environment. With Microsoft Security Center, you have a complete overview of your environment. You know the software inventory, and you have security recommendations. You can not only see that the antivirus is up to date; you can also see where are the vulnerabilities in your system. Microsoft Security Center tells you where you have old, deprecated software and what kind of CVEs are addressed. It's really cool stuff."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has significantly impacted our security posture."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use the solution right out of the box without too much configuration."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been leading the field in EDR, and there are so many benefits to how that is managed versus the traditional products; that's huge."
"Technical support is good."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is good and easy to set up."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
 

Cons

"Some of the integrations that Defender should include involve the use of the web app."
"The frequency of the patching, and the frequency of the updates, are not included with the free version."
"Lacks some additional integration."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint could improve by adding more security features."
"There could be an increase in security for the solution."
"The end-user also cannot do some advanced actions on it. It's a little bit complicated for our end-user, so it needs to be simplified."
"Phishing and Malware detection could be better."
"I'm not too sure of its current capabilities, but I'm pretty sure they are doing a good job on Windows and Mac. However, I'm not sure whether they covered Linux. If I remember correctly, Microsoft Defender didn't have anything proper on Linux back then, but if they have improved it from that aspect, it would already be ticking all the boxes."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"One problem is that the solution takes too much RAM from the client."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is free."
"We have been using the free version."
"The price is fair for the features Microsoft delivers. If you want tailor-made features, you have to mix different licenses. It isn't straightforward."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is an expensive solution."
"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."
"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."
"Microsoft Defender is an expensive product in my country."
"Microsoft Defender ATP is expensive."
"If you purchase licenses in bulk the price of the licenses can decrease."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee of about €20 per computer."
"The price is comparable."
"The product has average pricing."
"The cost of the solution depends on the size of the company and where the licenses are being ordered from."
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%
Comms Service Provider
21%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
8%
 

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 Business6
Large Enterprise1
 

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 F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
The pricing is scalable. We can purchase more licenses if needed. It's a more cost-effective solution compared to Darktrace, which requires a special device purchase.
What needs improvement with F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
One problem is that the solution takes too much RAM from the client. It would help if it used less RAM in future versions.
What is your primary use case for F-Secure Protection Service for Business?
Our primary use case for WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection ( /products/withsecure-elements-endpoint-protection-reviews ) is to secure our computers. We have a yearly license for it and use it...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus
F-Secure Elements Endpoint Protection, F-Secure Protection Service for Business
 

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. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.