ThreatDown, powered by Malwarebytes vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

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.

Incentivized

Usually we had lots two platforms tasked with scanning exposures, anti-malware and provision for information and threat management. But with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint we have an all inclusive platform that even integrate with other Microsoft security apps such as Microsoft Defender for Cloud for enhanced threat insights and visibility.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• It provides a unified security experience when combined with other Microsoft products such as Microsoft Defender for 365 and Azure Defender.
• It has an excellent dashboard and centralized view that make it easy to see and control everything from one location.
• It's an EDR tool designed to help you understand incidents and alerts better.
• Real-time detection of attacks and prompt endpoint device responses. It effortlessly interacts with additional Microsoft security products.

Incentivized

• When you push install to clients, sometimes it will fail with generic errors, and it's hard to find out what is the cause of failure. Fortunately, it doesn't require too many changes on the client-side but it takes time to figure it out.
• When we bought it, we had an option to buy it with email support or phone support. The phone support was very high priced, so we ended up buying email support. when we experience any issues, it takes a long time to get a resolution. Fortunately, we haven't used their support much.
• It had a few incidents with false calls. We are using software that generates reports in MS Word format. The software will call Word to open with a report, but the anti-exploit will consider this as a threat and will block the function. You can put Word in an exception but it won't protect Word from a real exploit in the future.

Incentivized

• Does not allow for remediation from the management console.
• The ticket system doesn't alert the person assigned to the ticket.
• You have to submit requests for whitelisting applications.
• Scanning exclusions are tricky to find.
• Adding devices, especially Apple devices, is very cumbersome.

Incentivized

The renewal decision is not up to me and also, the current economic situation might not allow renewal

Incentivized

The software is very easy to manage. In 4 years, we hardly have experienced any issues. It simply works.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

The first time I tried to onboard my macOS endpoints to MDE I struggled for quite a bit. I had to reach out to Microsoft's MDE support team. The tech was very helpful in walking me through the steps during a screen share session

Incentivized

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.

in an overall protection sentinelone is providing better protection for us, but as it comes with subscription's limitation, we have to be really careful in managing the licenses, the MS Defender for endpoint is providing us a decent protection which we are not complaining about, why we chose them ? as mentioned, this is coming with our subscription

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• By providing robust threat protection, Defender for Endpoint can prevent downtime caused by security issues. Employees can work without interruptions, leading to increased productivity.
• By significantly decreasing the frequency of security incidents like malware infections and data breaches, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can protect your network. The cost of incident response, cleanup, and potential regulatory fines are reduced as a result of the decrease in events.
• The implementation and configuration of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint may require an initial investment in licensing, training, and deployment, which can temporarily affect ROI.
• The cost of licensing can be substantial, especially for larger organizations. This cost needs to be factored into the ROI calculation.

Incentivized