Bitdefender GravityZone combines multiple security services into a single platform to reduce the cost of building a trusted environment for endpoints.
N/A
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
ThreatDown replaces the former Malwarebytes for Business product suite, combining Malwarebytes' endpoint security capabilities in four bundles. The basic Core tier includes incident response, Next-gen AV, device control, vulnerability assessments, and the ability to block unwanted application. Higher tiers include EDR and MDR services, managed threat hunting, patch management, website content filtering.
$207
per year 3 devices (minimum)
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Core
$69
per year per endpoint
Advanced
$79
per year per endpoint
Elite
$99
per year per endpoint
Ultimate
$119
per year per endpoint
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitdefender GravityZone
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Optional Add-Ons include server and mobile device protection. Server protection ranges from $129 to $179 per annum depending on service tier. Mobile security is $10 per device, no matter the service tier.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Bitdefender GravityZone
ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes
Considered Both Products
Bitdefender GravityZone
Verified User
Administrator
Chose Bitdefender GravityZone
We can't accurately answer this as the others are very good too... we like Bitdefender because it makes operations and management easier and more visible.
Compared to Malwarebytes and Webroot (Endpoint Protection), Bitdefender is far superior. A principal reason for switching was the high detection rate, near 100%, along with heuristics and the ability to neutralise zero-day threats. Previous products we've used fell short of the …
It just works. I have seen multiple viruses and malware get past other antivirus software like TrendMicro, Webroot, and Kaspersky. Bitdefender GravityZone always catches what others miss. It has a very light footprint when it comes to system resources. The centralized management console is nice, but I prefer the console before they redesigned the UI.
I think Malwarebytes is the best anti-malware company. I think it is well-suited for any situation and any device. I think Malwarebytes does the best on Windows and on MacOS. Also, Malwarebytes is always improving, and you can tell they are a company that stays on top of cybersecurity trends. If you have a tight budget or looking for the cheapest solution, then Malwarebytes may not be the solution for you. To clarify, I don't think Malwarebytes is that much more expensive compared to its closest competitors.
Once installed, Bitdefender [GravityZone] runs silently in the background with little to no need for user interaction.
The cloud-based console provides for easy computer management and deployment.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is extremely flexible, with a policy-based system wherein different profiles can be created (i.e. a policy to deactivate the firewall, a policy to allow for admin control on a machine, etc.) and pushed out to individual computers.
Computers can be grouped into different categories, with different policies automatically deployed to each category.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is relatively resource-light and runs well even on lower-end computers.
Protects against malware - No matter how much training you give end users on social hacking, there is always a breach at some point.
Protects against ransomware - Ransomware could spell disaster for a company...it could literally shut the doors for good.
Centralized administration - Without a terrific centralized method to manage all the systems being protected, it would require an extra position just to maintain all endpoints.
Who do I ask? This is my chief complaint is once the initial licenses were purchased through Bit Defender, there was no one to contact that could help navigate some of the initial questions I had with regard to specific policies to implement for our file server. The parent web site is, well, hard to navigate when one is trying to "learn" the system.
The second issue is in increasing the licenses. It took several days for the parent company (by contact and phone) to inform me that they could not increase the licenses and I would have to go through a private vendor. There was no intent to connect me to a vendor or provide a vendor list until I asked specifically. YET I continue to get email from the parent company reminding me to pay an annual fee for the licenses purchase through the private vendor. The parent company can see the number of licenses yet did not sell them to me.
Gravity Zone Dashboard, while excellent for those who have experience, is not particularly intuitive for those who have never used it. There does not seem to be a lot of documentation for those responsible for implementation.
It works. I rely heavily on my vendors to provide a product that works, is easy to implement, and that they support. As well as be a decent value for the money
The console is easy to use, but has grown to have a lot of functionality. The only challenge is that all functions (even disabled and not installed ones) are shown. It would be great if only the functions that are active would be visible.
Support is an area Bitdefender has always struggled with. While their products work great, the GravityZone dashboard is very technical in nature. If you aren't IT inclined, it could be difficult to setup. While most times support is helpful, we tend to work with them over email because of their very thick accent, they are hard to understand over the phone.
Whenever I've had a query for the support team, they have got back to me very quickly, and given me very well detailed advice on fixing whatever the issue I had was. They also pointed me to help documents and such where I could find more information if I needed
We were a Kaspersky shop for years. Kaspersky was a resource hog and it didn't even block half of what was thrown at it. We had more outbreaks and more end-user complaints in a year of Kaspersky then we have had in almost three years of Bitdefender.
It's no contest. Cisco AMP, Umbrella and Endpoint use vast amounts of resources and provide little protection when compared with Malwarebytes. One client recently replaced Cisco with MWB and found over 7,300 vulnerabilities on 352 endpoints, including 120 listed as Critical and 7,180 listed as High, with CVE's dating back to 2008.
The ROI for Bitdefender is hard to quantify except that it requires very little maintenance time from our staff.
We've spent no time troubleshooting user complaints or issues from users, so it has been a big time-saver over our previously used anti-malware software.
Bitdefender's customer service is usually pretty good and also very responsive, so I don't have to wait by the phone or to keep checking email to resolve a problem--although our issues have been mostly informational and not a problem with functionality.
Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection has had a HUGE positive impact on our ROI as we eliminated the need for an entire server, CALs & other licenses as well.
We are saving a lot of time on the management side of Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection as compared to others as it is cloud based and we are able to manage it from everywhere and not just one server. This has improved our performance and reduced expenses as well.