Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
SonicWall Capture Client Logo

Top 10 SonicWall Capture Client Alternatives

Vendor: SonicWall
4.0 out of 5
Leave a review

Top SonicWall Capture Client Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to SonicWall Capture Client based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, and Fortinet FortiEDR. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. SonicWall Capture Client surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive endpoint protection with real-time threat detection, advanced remediation capabilities, and seamless integration with cloud-based management, enhancing security and simplifying IT management for businesses of all sizes.

SonicWall Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with SonicWall, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
CrowdStrike Falcon excels in advanced threat analysis and endpoint detection, appealing to enterprises needing comprehensive protection. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client offers cost-effective simplicity with features like quick recovery, attracting small to medium-sized businesses prioritizing ease of deployment and on-premises usability.
Download CrowdStrike Falcon vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
CrowdStrike Falcon has a higher setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client. SonicWall Capture Client offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to cost-conscious users seeking cost-effective solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
CrowdStrike Falcon has a higher setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client. SonicWall Capture Client offers a more budget-friendly setup, appealing to cost-conscious users seeking cost-effective solutions.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
4.1 out of 5
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is praised for robust threat detection and Microsoft tool integration. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client features advanced security like real-time malware prevention. Microsoft Defender offers competitive pricing and significant ROI, while SonicWall Capture Client's extensive feature set justifies its higher pricing.
Download Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint requires a higher initial setup cost, whereas SonicWall Capture Client has a more affordable setup cost.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint requires a higher initial setup cost, whereas SonicWall Capture Client has a more affordable setup cost.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiEDR offers comprehensive threat detection, user-friendliness, and cost-effective solutions. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client excels in malware prevention, reliability, and superior performance. Fortinet FortiEDR requires enhanced integrations, while SonicWall Capture Client needs better scalability and Mac support. Fortinet FortiEDR ensures straightforward deployment.
Download Fortinet FortiEDR vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Fortinet FortiEDR setup cost is described as moderate, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is highlighted for its lower initial setup expense. Fortinet offers comprehensive features at a higher cost, while SonicWall provides essential capabilities with budget-friendly pricing.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiEDR setup cost is described as moderate, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is highlighted for its lower initial setup expense. Fortinet offers comprehensive features at a higher cost, while SonicWall provides essential capabilities with budget-friendly pricing.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SentinelOne Singularity Complete
4.3 out of 5
SentinelOne Singularity Complete excels in real-time threat detection with advanced machine learning capabilities. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client offers extensive integration options, making it suitable for complex environments. SentinelOne is noted for cost-effectiveness, while SonicWall justifies its higher price with robust features.
Download SentinelOne Singularity Complete vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
The setup cost for SentinelOne Singularity Complete is relatively higher compared to SonicWall Capture Client, which is known for its affordability. SentinelOne focuses on comprehensive security features, while SonicWall provides cost-effective endpoint protection.
View comparison
Pricing
The setup cost for SentinelOne Singularity Complete is relatively higher compared to SonicWall Capture Client, which is known for its affordability. SentinelOne focuses on comprehensive security features, while SonicWall provides cost-effective endpoint protection.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Microsoft Defender XDR
4.2 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client and Microsoft Defender XDR are comprehensive endpoint security solutions with distinct strengths. In comparison, users highlight SonicWall's pricing and support while valuing Defender's advanced features. Tech buyers choose SonicWall for affordability and usability, whereas Defender attracts those needing extensive integration and detection capabilities.
Download Microsoft Defender XDR vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
SonicWall Capture Client has a setup cost that is notably higher compared to Microsoft Defender XDR, which provides a more cost-effective initial implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
SonicWall Capture Client has a setup cost that is notably higher compared to Microsoft Defender XDR, which provides a more cost-effective initial implementation.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
4.2 out of 5
Cortex XDR offers advanced threat detection through behavioral analytics and extensive threat intelligence, ideal for comprehensive security needs. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client provides seamless integration with SonicWall products and a user-friendly interface, catering to those seeking straightforward deployment and ease of use.
Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks generally involves a higher setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks generally involves a higher setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable initial investment.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Fortinet FortiClient
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiClient is praised for its robust VPN capabilities and integration with Fortinet infrastructure. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client excels in advanced threat protection and endpoint detection and response. Fortinet FortiClient users appreciate its cost-effective pricing, while SonicWall Capture Client delivers higher value through a more extensive feature set.
Download Fortinet FortiClient vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Fortinet FortiClient's setup cost is relatively low, while SonicWall Capture Client's setup cost is comparatively higher.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiClient's setup cost is relatively low, while SonicWall Capture Client's setup cost is comparatively higher.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform
4.0 out of 5
Trellix Endpoint Security excels with robust centralized management, offering features like antivirus and device control. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client emphasizes rollback capability, with extensive OS support for efficient endpoint management, catering to those seeking budget-friendly solutions and quick threat protection.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform Report
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform offers a flexible setup cost structure, while SonicWall Capture Client requires a fixed initial expenditure. Trellix's adaptable pricing can be beneficial for dynamic environments, contrasting SonicWall's straightforward, predictable cost setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform offers a flexible setup cost structure, while SonicWall Capture Client requires a fixed initial expenditure. Trellix's adaptable pricing can be beneficial for dynamic environments, contrasting SonicWall's straightforward, predictable cost setup.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Huntress Managed EDR
4.7 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client appeals with competitive pricing, real-time threat analysis, and seamless integration for efficient endpoint protection. In comparison, Huntress Managed EDR offers deep threat hunting and robust post-compromise investigation, delivering value for those prioritizing advanced security capabilities despite a higher cost.
Download Huntress Managed EDR vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
SonicWall Capture Client has a competitive setup cost, while Huntress Managed EDR may involve higher initial expenses but offers extensive features. Each solution provides distinct pricing benefits aligned with their unique functionalities.
View comparison
Pricing
SonicWall Capture Client has a competitive setup cost, while Huntress Managed EDR may involve higher initial expenses but offers extensive features. Each solution provides distinct pricing benefits aligned with their unique functionalities.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Symantec Endpoint Security
3.8 out of 5
Symantec Endpoint Security offers advanced threat detection and a comprehensive security suite. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client excels in real-time malware protection and easy integration. Symantec's customer support is highly regarded, whereas SonicWall provides competitive pricing and fast ROI with efficient malware prevention.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. Symantec Endpoint Security Report
Symantec Endpoint Security has a moderate setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Symantec Endpoint Security has a moderate setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable initial setup.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Check Point Harmony Endpoint
4.4 out of 5
Check Point Harmony Endpoint provides a wide range of integrated features like real-time threat prevention and Zero Phishing, appealing to those valuing comprehensive security. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client, while offering robust protection and a user-friendly interface, excels in content filtering.
Download Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Check Point Harmony Endpoint features an affordable setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client presents a higher expense, highlighting a key cost difference between these endpoint protection solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Check Point Harmony Endpoint features an affordable setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client presents a higher expense, highlighting a key cost difference between these endpoint protection solutions.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business
4.0 out of 5
Kaspersky offers comprehensive threat protection and user-friendly reliability, while SonicWall provides robust detection and seamless integration. In comparison, Kaspersky is cost-effective, with straightforward deployment, whereas SonicWall's advanced capabilities and cloud-based management justify the higher price. Each solution appeals to different security and budget needs.
Download Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has low setup costs, while SonicWall Capture Client requires a higher investment for setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business has low setup costs, while SonicWall Capture Client requires a higher investment for setup.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
4.1 out of 5
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security excels in support and intuitive features. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client offers advanced functionalities and real-time threat intelligence. Trend Vision One has competitive setup costs, while SonicWall Capture Client justifies its higher price with comprehensive features and satisfactory ROI. Trend Vision One is user-friendly.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. Trend Vision One Endpoint Security Report
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security has a higher setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable setup option. Trend Vision One is suited for larger budgets, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is ideal for cost-conscious customers.
View comparison
Pricing
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security has a higher setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more affordable setup option. Trend Vision One is suited for larger budgets, whereas SonicWall Capture Client is ideal for cost-conscious customers.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform
4.1 out of 5
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is appreciated for comprehensive threat detection and ease of managing devices. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client is praised for advanced threat protection and seamless integration. ESET emphasizes user-friendly management, while SonicWall focuses on advanced security protocols, justifying its higher cost.
Download ESET Endpoint Protection Platform vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform features a straightforward and cost-effective setup, while SonicWall Capture Client's setup may involve higher initial costs and complexity.
View comparison
Pricing
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform features a straightforward and cost-effective setup, while SonicWall Capture Client's setup may involve higher initial costs and complexity.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Intercept X Endpoint
4.2 out of 5
Intercept X Endpoint excels in advanced threat protection, particularly in ransomware detection, making it appealing for organizations with stringent security needs. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client's seamless integration with other SonicWall products and network visibility offers a compelling choice for businesses seeking robust, interconnected solutions.
Download Intercept X Endpoint vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
The setup cost for Intercept X Endpoint is affordable, while SonicWall Capture Client is noted for its competitive pricing. Intercept X Endpoint offers advanced threat protection, contrasting with SonicWall's robust network security features.
View comparison
Pricing
The setup cost for Intercept X Endpoint is affordable, while SonicWall Capture Client is noted for its competitive pricing. Intercept X Endpoint offers advanced threat protection, contrasting with SonicWall's robust network security features.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint
3.9 out of 5
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint excels in advanced threat detection and response capabilities. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client is noted for its comprehensive network protection. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint offers real-time analytics and proactive threat mitigation, whereas SonicWall Capture Client integrates seamlessly with SonicWall’s network security suite.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint Report
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint has a significant initial setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more budget-friendly setup option.
View comparison
Pricing
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint has a significant initial setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more budget-friendly setup option.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Bitdefender Total Security
4.4 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client is valued for advanced threat protection and endpoint detection capabilities, while Bitdefender Total Security includes comprehensive tools such as multi-layer ransomware protection and VPN. In comparison, SonicWall's simplified interface is contrasted by Bitdefender's superior customer service and cross-platform support.
Download Bitdefender Total Security vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
SonicWall Capture Client has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which offers a more affordable initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
SonicWall Capture Client has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which offers a more affordable initial investment.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
WatchGuard EPDR
4.2 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
WatchGuard EPDR
4.2 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client is valued for ease of deployment and comprehensive protection capabilities. In comparison, WatchGuard EPDR excels in advanced threat detection and network security integration. SonicWall is cost-effective, while WatchGuard's feature set justifies its higher price despite its resource consumption.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. WatchGuard EPDR Report
SonicWall Capture Client has a lower setup cost, while WatchGuard EPDR requires a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
SonicWall Capture Client has a lower setup cost, while WatchGuard EPDR requires a higher initial investment.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Malwarebytes Teams
4.0 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Malwarebytes Teams
4.0 out of 5
Malwarebytes Teams excels in threat detection with cloud management and rollback features, while SonicWall Capture Client provides advanced real-time protection and sandboxing. In comparison, SonicWall integrates well with firewalls. Tech buyers might choose Malwarebytes for robust remediation, or SonicWall for comprehensive security.
Download Malwarebytes Teams vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Malwarebytes Teams has a straightforward setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more structured pricing model with tiered options.
View comparison
Pricing
Malwarebytes Teams has a straightforward setup cost, while SonicWall Capture Client offers a more structured pricing model with tiered options.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
NetWitness NDR
4.0 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
NetWitness NDR
4.0 out of 5
NetWitness NDR excels in comprehensive detection and extensive network visibility. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client is praised for its detailed threat analysis and robust endpoint protection. NetWitness is ideal for network monitoring, while SonicWall stands out in endpoint security and ease of deployment.
Download NetWitness NDR vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
NetWitness NDR has a higher initial setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client, which is more budget-friendly. The key difference lies in their setup expenses, making NetWitness NDR more suitable for larger budgets.
View comparison
Pricing
NetWitness NDR has a higher initial setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client, which is more budget-friendly. The key difference lies in their setup expenses, making NetWitness NDR more suitable for larger budgets.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​
3.9 out of 5
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection excels in low performance requirements and robust AI functionality, making it ideal for cost-conscious buyers. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client appeals with its detailed endpoint management and multi-engine sandboxing, suitable for environments needing comprehensive OS support.
Download OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers a straightforward setup with minimal costs, while SonicWall Capture Client involves higher initial setup expenses, highlighting a key cost difference between the two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers a straightforward setup with minimal costs, while SonicWall Capture Client involves higher initial setup expenses, highlighting a key cost difference between the two solutions.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security
4.1 out of 5
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security excels in advanced threat detection and comprehensive reporting tools. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client is valued for real-time threat intelligence and quick installation. A tech buyer might choose Bitdefender for its extensive features, while SonicWall appeals with its robust performance and simple management.
Download Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security has a lower setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client. SonicWall Capture Client, however, provides a more robust initial security configuration.
View comparison
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security has a lower setup cost compared to SonicWall Capture Client. SonicWall Capture Client, however, provides a more robust initial security configuration.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Open EDR
4.0 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Open EDR
4.0 out of 5
Open EDR provides robust threat detection and response capabilities, offering valuable features for data security, including real-time analysis and customizable alerts. Users appreciate its extensive integration options. However, improvements in documentation and better customer support would enhance its user experience.
View comparison
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Morphisec excels in pricing and user support. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client impresses with comprehensive features and perceived value. Morphisec users appreciate its lightweight nature, while SonicWall Capture Client holds an edge with detailed threat detection, despite slightly more complex deployment and higher cost.
Download Morphisec vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
Morphisec is praised for its straightforward setup with minimal initial costs, while SonicWall Capture Client is noted for higher setup expenses but offers extensive integration features.
View comparison
Pricing
Morphisec is praised for its straightforward setup with minimal initial costs, while SonicWall Capture Client is noted for higher setup expenses but offers extensive integration features.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Sophos EPP Suite
4.1 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Sophos EPP Suite
4.1 out of 5
Sophos EPP Suite is favored for its superior advanced threat protection and extensive endpoint security tools. In comparison, SonicWall Capture Client excels with real-time threat detection and seamless integration. While Sophos EPP Suite offers cost-effective pricing, SonicWall Capture Client stands out for smooth deployment and commendable customer support.
Download SonicWall Capture Client vs. Sophos EPP Suite Report
Sophos EPP Suite has a lower setup cost with straightforward initial configuration, while SonicWall Capture Client incurs a higher setup cost due to more complex deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
Sophos EPP Suite has a lower setup cost with straightforward initial configuration, while SonicWall Capture Client incurs a higher setup cost due to more complex deployment.
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
SonicWall Capture Client Logo
Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud
3.7 out of 5
SonicWall Capture Client emphasizes robust threat detection and real-time response features. In comparison, Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud offers comprehensive security with advanced application control. SonicWall needs better performance efficiency, while Kaspersky could improve reporting. Kaspersky is noted for quicker setup and improved ROI, while SonicWall is appreciated for effective support.
Download Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud vs. SonicWall Capture Client Report
SonicWall Capture Client has a moderate setup cost, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is known for its more affordable setup cost. SonicWall offers an extensive feature set which may justify its higher initial investment compared to Kaspersky.
View comparison
Pricing
SonicWall Capture Client has a moderate setup cost, while Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is known for its more affordable setup cost. SonicWall offers an extensive feature set which may justify its higher initial investment compared to Kaspersky.

Related categories

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)