CrowdStrike offers the Falcon Endpoint Protection suite, an antivirus and endpoint protection system emphasizing threat detection, machine learning malware detection, and signature free updating. Additionally the available Falcon Spotlight module delivers vulnerability assessment with no performance impact, no additional agents, hardware, scheduled scans, firewall exceptions or admin credentials.
$59.99
per endpoint/month (minimum number of endpoints applies)
Rapid7 InsightVM
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
InsightVM is presented as the next evolution of Nexpose, by Rapid7. This Insight cloud-based solution features everything included in Nexpose, such as Adaptive Security and the proprietary Real Risk score, and extends visibility into cloud and containerized infrastructure. InsightVM also offers advanced remediation, tracking, and reporting capabilities not included in Nexpose.
$19
per GB
Pricing
CrowdStrike Falcon
Rapid7 InsightVM
Editions & Modules
Falcon Go (Small Business)
$59.99
per endpoint/month (minimum number of endpoints applies)
Falcon Go (Small Business)
$59.99
Falcon Pro
$99.99
per endpoint/month (for 5-250 endpoints, billed annually)
Falcon Enterprise
$184.99
per endpoint/month (minimum number of endpoints applies)
I have evaluated Cortex XDR and SentinelOne Singularity alongside CrowdStrike Falcon, and while all three are capable enterprise-grade solutions, Falcon ultimately stood out due to its cloud-native architecture, broader modular coverage, and stronger identity-focused detection. …
It was just a legacy AV program onboarded during initial setup days. As the org. As it expanded, its threat landscape also grew, and we needed a next-gen solution to protect against evolving threat vectors. Falcon EDR was the one that solved all these in a single place.
Depends on your network architecture.. NDR can be very expensive. EDR works on almost all network architectures, even those segmented networks. However if you rely on centralized switch and older style of network architecture, NDR should be asses and considered, especially if …
It stacks on top. We love the ease of use, the third-party integration, having AI, and the CrowdStrike team was way more helpful with our team, so that adoption was within a couple of months. We also compared prices, and the value was higher, with a faster ROI, which helps our …
There really wasn't a question. CrowdStrike is best in class and really doesn't have an equal in this space, any other threat protection vendor is a compromise in some area, and even though we are paying for the premier service, we can feel comfortable and protected with our …
Sentinelone is bit complicated language use in there console in compare to CrowdStrike Falcon. CrowdStrike Falcon have much big modules and features but sentinelone don't. CrowdStrike Falcon have one single unified agent and in sentinelone bit confused in selection of agent …
CrowdStrike is by far the superior product as we have had zero problems since installing compared to Trend where is positively failed us. We switched and again have had zero issues with the product and it protects our environment as it should without much interaction.
CrowdStrike Falcon is way ahead of Symantec, and covers features that defender XDR doesn't, even if you purchase all the addons. I think the only real competitors are Sentinel One, maybe Palo Alto or Huntress, or Carbon Black.
In my opinion, CrowdStrike Falcon provides superior detection and prevention capabilities over Jamf Protect. At the time we purchased (2017) CrowdStrike Falcon was more advanced than SentinelOne and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.
CrowdStrike Falcon is an industry leader in this sector and is superior in its low overhead agent, having minimal impact on end-users. We plan to migrate our macOS fleet when our existing contract expires.
Advance detection capability.Overwatch threat hunt team which proactively hunts your environment Interactive sandbox. Reduced false positives & ease of whitelisting to granular level.AI and ML can analyze events to identify subtle patterns that might indicate malicious …
In my opinion, CrowdStrike Falcon does a better job of detection than Carbon black in all forms. Compared to SentinelOne XDR, CrowdStrike Falcon does a better job of finding potential threats even though the machine learning based detection cause more False Positives than the …
It is superior on the following two: Advanced threat detection because AI and ML can analyze vast amounts of data to identify subtle patterns that might indicate malicious activity, even zero-day attacks (previously unknown threats).Reduced false positives because it can help …
At the time of purchase CrowdStrike provided the best featureset and value proposition for the organisation. The cloud first nature of the product and the mix of heuristic and behaviour based detection technologies was better than anything else that we looked at.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I …
Rapid7 InsightVM is more cost effective than the other solution on the market. It is easy to deploy and the user interface is easy to use and intuative. We select Rapid7 InsightVM mainly because it integrates well with ServiceNow compared to the other solution that were …
Rapid7 InsightVM is a more professional tool than NESSUS because historically, it was based on metasploit which is a powerful pentesting and exploiting tool. InsightVM covers more attacking scenarios and vulnerabilities than competitors and still a leader in this domain.cloud …
Nessus Pro does scans, but does not maintain an inventory from scan to scan. There is no history for a specific device, you have to look inside the results of each scan. Search across inventory is non-existent. There are no dashboards for data analysis. This is no tracking …
Tenable has a more refined look for the reporting that it provides as a result of scanning events, but Nexpose seems to have a better ability to help quantify risk and help prioritize the work needed to get the quickest security result for the team and the company. The Nessus …
CrowdStrike Falcon is ideal for large, cloud-native enterprises that prioritize advanced behavioral detection and have a mature SOC to manage their intelligence. However, its cloud-reliant architecture makes it a poor fit for air-gapped or offline networks. Additionally, small organizations with limited staffing may find it difficult to manage, while teams that require integrated SOAR and vulnerability management might be discouraged by the need for additional licensing to unlock those capabilities.
I think Rapid7 InsightVM is well suited for large enterprise customers with a lot of assets. It integrates well with a number of different ITSM solutions which I think is very good. There are not many CIS benchmarking tools on the market and Rapid7 InsightVM does a very good job at benchmarking. I think where Rapid7 InsightVM falls down a little is on false positive vulnerabilities. Sometime you there a few positive results on vulnerabily discovery. Tuning the settings for scan engines can sometimes be trick as well.
The API is also a great tool for us to automate lots of routine procedures like scan and report of asset(s) BY EMAIL.
Tagging. It helps sort out results and reports for respective assets Owner for remediation without a lengthy report including unnecessary information for that particular team.
SQL Reporting. It provides advanced reporting and export capabilities that you can not find in the stock report template.
Devices found and scanned are never removed. Removal must be done manually with no option for automation.
The database can be fragile. Ours quietly corrupted and progressively degraded until we had to restore and lose 6 months of data. Still didn't fix it and had to be rebuilt again losing all data.
Workflow for delegating remediation is supposed to be helpful, but can also become cumbersome.
Scheduling can become a nightmare if not monitored closely. We found jobs had failed to run because the server had gone offline. When the server came online, it did not try to run missed jobs. Running missed jobs all at once can overload the server, but searching for and launching a large number of missed jobs manually is a pain.
Crowdstrike has a large suite of tools built for helping the engineers triage and respond to security event whenever identified. The ability to customize the security policies and implement more granular policies to different devices based on the functionality is unmatched. Crowdstrike provides so much of ability in a decent budget which ascertains the value for money or ROI.
I think it is a complete and very trustful XDR platform, with very few False Positives. It is very well supported by highly skilled professionals on all levels: from pre-sales engineers, Customer Account Managers and support engineers.
While I think it is a great tool and platform, I believe it (like all tools and solutions) is always evolving and the needs for clients are changing as the industry evolves and threats are upgraded. Cost is good, and support is helpful. Some things could be more granular and others could be easier to understand
Support is generally pretty fast and gets right to the issue. We haven't had to use them much, fortunately, but the issues and questions we've had are usually answered quickly. The customer success manager/account manager you're assigned will also follow up with you on a regular cadence to ensure you're getting the most out of the subscription. There's not a whole lot of room to improve, other than the general confusion about what is/what is not covered in custom packages you're subscribed to. The initial purchase took much longer because of a package name changes and realignments of different modules into those packages.
I gave it a seven due to the functionality and general ease of use after the initial setup headaches, but compared to Qualys, Rapid7 Nexpose falls short on features and ease of use. Their support drags this rating down a point as well. I have gone weeks with no update on semi-critical issues and typically have to make call after call to get a semi-coherent response.
There is limited amount of learning that can be completed in an in-person training available. In my opinion, the self-paced learning provided by Falcon portal is more useful over in-person training. The support from Falcon is great and useful to overcome difficulties, if any.
The training provided by Crowdstrike Falcon is complete in terms of the depth of technical knowledge and teaches the users about going through with the platform. There are lots of jargons for different tools that Crowdstrike Falcon has and this training teaches them all which helps in managing the platform better. Plus, the regular knowledge checks are also very helpful for the end user.
I have evaluated Cortex XDR and SentinelOne Singularity alongside CrowdStrike Falcon, and while all three are capable enterprise-grade solutions, Falcon ultimately stood out due to its cloud-native architecture, broader modular coverage, and stronger identity-focused detection. Cortex XDR performs very well in environments already heavily invested in the Palo Alto ecosystem, particularly for network-to-endpoint correlation, but it introduces additional complexity and infrastructure overhead. SentinelOne excels in autonomous remediation and offline protection, especially with ransomware rollback, but is more endpoint-centric and comparatively limited in native identity and exposure-risk context. CrowdStrike Falcon provided the best overall balance by combining NGAV, EDR, identity protection, exposure management, threat intelligence, and managed hunting within a single lightweight agent and unified console, enabling better scalability, faster investigations, reduced tool sprawl, and stronger protection against modern identity-driven attacks, making it the most aligned choice for our security and operational objectives.
I think Tenable is very comparable and they are both leaders in this space. I evaluated both of them side-by-side and ultimately decided to go with Rapid7. Tenable did have a slight edge on the amount of information I was getting from the machines, but I landed on R7 because I found the features of the InsightVM tool to be more useful. They both get the job done, but I found InsightVM a better experience to use on a day-to-day basis and had better quality of life features that I was looking for.
Due to some of the difficulties with Support and Sales, we are likely looking to change to another vendor. We sometimes don't feel like customers.
When the bluescreen incident occurred (worldwide outage) in July 2024, we were unable to contact support due to the high volume of calls at the same time. We had to figure out how to remediate it ourselves, which we did, and recovered before the vendor's official release of fixes. It shook my confidence in them.
The product itself performed well over the last 2 years, which has kept us safe and productive. The product is good.
It certainly has a more positive impact than negative impact while performing the scans. Nexpose can find report vulnerabilities that our other scanner fails to identify during the scan because of its defined scan templates.
Also, even if the scan is not being performed due to some issues like reachability, whitelisting, etc. it will try to give scan results unlike QualysGuard which just marks the asset as unreachable.
