Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo

Top 10 Cisco Secure Endpoint Alternatives

Vendor: Cisco
4.3 out of 5
261 followers
Start review

Top Cisco Secure Endpoint Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Cisco Secure Endpoint 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.

Cisco Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Cisco, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CrowdStrike Falcon
4.3 out of 5
CrowdStrike Falcon offers advanced real-time threat detection and a lightweight design, ideal for quick deployments. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with integration across Cisco's suite, providing extensive threat visibility and Talos intelligence, beneficial for organizations using Cisco's broader security ecosystem.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Report
CrowdStrike Falcon has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint may involve more complex expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
CrowdStrike Falcon has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint may involve more complex expenses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
4.1 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in {valuable_features_data} and {features_overall_comparison}, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint stands out in terms of {valuable_features_data}. In comparison, Cisco users appreciate {feature_1}, {feature_2}, Microsoft users value {feature_3}, {feature_4}.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers a lower setup cost, making it a more cost-effective option for initial deployment.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers a lower setup cost, making it a more cost-effective option for initial deployment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiEDR
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiEDR excels in pricing and support, offering strong endpoint protection and threat detection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides a comprehensive security suite with advanced features. Fortinet is noted for easier deployment, while Cisco's superior integration and long-term value attract tech buyers seeking robust performance.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fortinet FortiEDR Report
Fortinet FortiEDR offers competitive setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiEDR offers competitive setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
SentinelOne Singularity Complete
4.3 out of 5
SentinelOne Singularity Complete excels in automated threat detection and response capabilities. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint integrates well with other Cisco products and offers advanced threat intelligence. SentinelOne is appreciated for swift deployment, while Cisco users value comprehensive features and integration benefits.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. SentinelOne Singularity Complete Report
SentinelOne Singularity Complete has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making SentinelOne suitable for businesses willing to invest more upfront for enhanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
SentinelOne Singularity Complete has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making SentinelOne suitable for businesses willing to invest more upfront for enhanced features.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender XDR
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in integrating with existing Cisco infrastructure, offering robust threat detection. In comparison, Microsoft Defender XDR provides comprehensive extended detection and response features with seamless integration into Microsoft products. Cisco's simplicity in deployment contrasts Microsoft's competitive pricing and versatile capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender XDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost and more complex implementation process, while Microsoft Defender XDR offers lower initial costs and simpler installation.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost and more complex implementation process, while Microsoft Defender XDR offers lower initial costs and simpler installation.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
4.2 out of 5
Cortex XDR offers efficient threat detection and integration with Palo Alto's ecosystem. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint delivers advanced automated response actions and extensive telemetry data. Cortex XDR requires enhancements in reporting and incident response, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint's policy management is complex. Cortex XDR is cost-effective, while Cisco Secure Endpoint justifies its higher price with extensive features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Report
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable initial setup.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Fortinet FortiClient
4.0 out of 5
Fortinet FortiClient offers competitive pricing and comprehensive threat protection, appealing to those seeking easy integration within Fortinet's ecosystem. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection and seamless integration with Cisco's security products, attracting buyers interested in sophisticated features and substantial ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Fortinet FortiClient Report
Fortinet FortiClient has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, emphasizing Fortinet's cost-efficiency. Cisco offers advanced features that may justify its higher setup cost for some users.
View comparison
Pricing
Fortinet FortiClient has a straightforward setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment, emphasizing Fortinet's cost-efficiency. Cisco offers advanced features that may justify its higher setup cost for some users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Elastic Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Elastic Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint features integration and threat intelligence, while Elastic Security excels in data analytics and anomaly detection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint would benefit from improved reporting. Elastic Security needs better documentation. Cisco Secure Endpoint is easier to deploy; Elastic Security offers strong community support.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Elastic Security Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint users report lower setup costs, while Elastic Security users mention higher setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint users report lower setup costs, while Elastic Security users mention higher setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Symantec Endpoint Security
3.8 out of 5
Symantec Endpoint Security offers a comprehensive unified approach featuring threat intelligence and behavior analytics. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with advanced malware protection, sandboxing, and retrospective security. Symantec Endpoint Security needs optimization; Cisco Secure Endpoint requires enhanced detection capabilities. Users find Symantec straightforward to deploy; Cisco has superior service. Symantec provides competitive pricing; Cisco offers better ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Security Report
Symantec Endpoint Security users report lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint setup costs are higher, indicating a significant price difference.
View comparison
Pricing
Symantec Endpoint Security users report lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint setup costs are higher, indicating a significant price difference.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
HP Wolf Security
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
HP Wolf Security
3.9 out of 5
HP Wolf Security is praised for its isolation technology, effectively containing threats before they spread. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced analytics and real-time threat detection. HP Wolf Security's seamless integration into workflows contrasts with Cisco Secure Endpoint's sophisticated analytics capabilities.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. HP Wolf Security Report
HP Wolf Security offers a low setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial investment but may provide long-term savings.
View comparison
Pricing
HP Wolf Security offers a low setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial investment but may provide long-term savings.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Tanium
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Tanium
3.8 out of 5
Tanium offers dependability and extensive capabilities, while Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in integration and ease of use. In comparison, Tanium is praised for real-time data collection, and Cisco Secure Endpoint integrates well with other Cisco products. Tanium’s setup is complex but effective, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint features simpler deployment.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Tanium Report
Tanium has a high initial setup cost, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a more affordable setup. Tanium users often mention the complexity of initial deployment, contrasting with Cisco Secure Endpoint's straightforward installation process.
View comparison
Pricing
Tanium has a high initial setup cost, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a more affordable setup. Tanium users often mention the complexity of initial deployment, contrasting with Cisco Secure Endpoint's straightforward installation process.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
4.1 out of 5
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security offers comprehensive threat detection and response capabilities. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in advanced malware protection and seamless integration with other Cisco products. Trend Vision, with its competitive pricing, contrasts Cisco Secure Endpoint's higher cost justified by its robust features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trend Vision One Endpoint Security Report
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security has a lower setup cost, making it more affordable upfront, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security has a lower setup cost, making it more affordable upfront, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint requires a higher initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business
4.0 out of 5
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business offers strong malware protection, threat intelligence, and policy management. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection, cloud-delivered security, and integration capabilities, making it ideal for complex environments. Kaspersky's simpler deployment contrasts with Cisco's higher cost and advanced features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business Report
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business incurs higher setup costs compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, with users appreciating the latter's more straightforward implementation process.
View comparison
Pricing
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business incurs higher setup costs compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, with users appreciating the latter's more straightforward implementation process.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trellix Endpoint Security
4.0 out of 5
Trellix Endpoint Security excels with its threat detection and straightforward deployment. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers extensive features and strong customer support. Trellix focuses on cost-effectiveness, while Cisco provides higher overall value with its comprehensive security suite despite higher costs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Report
Trellix Endpoint Security users report a lower setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a moderate initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Trellix Endpoint Security users report a lower setup cost, while Cisco Secure Endpoint presents a moderate initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Intercept X Endpoint
4.2 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for its integration with Cisco infrastructure and customer support, while Intercept X Endpoint excels with deep learning and anti-exploit technology. In comparison, Intercept X Endpoint's advanced threat prevention justifies higher initial costs, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint offers competitive pricing and seamless Cisco ecosystem integration.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Intercept X Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup cost is described as "higher but manageable," while Intercept X Endpoint is noted for "significantly lower initial setup costs."
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint's setup cost is described as "higher but manageable," while Intercept X Endpoint is noted for "significantly lower initial setup costs."
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform
4.1 out of 5
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform appeals to those seeking affordability and reliable support, excelling in malware detection and low system resource usage. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint's advanced threat intelligence and integration with other Cisco products justify its higher cost, benefiting large enterprises with detailed reporting.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. ESET Endpoint Protection Platform Report
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
ESET Endpoint Protection Platform has a lower setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, making it a more budget-friendly option.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trend Vision One
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trend Vision One
4.3 out of 5

Trend Vision One offers comprehensive protection for endpoints, networks, and email with centralized visibility. It is valued for its attack surface management, real-time threat detection, integrated management, ease of deployment, and user-friendly interface.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trend Vision One Report
It would be nice if it was a little bit cheaper, but I think it has a fair price. It is comparable to others in the market.
The price is reasonable. It's not exorbitant. CrowdStrike and other players are on the higher side.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
It would be nice if it was a little bit cheaper, but I think it has a fair price. It is comparable to others in the market.
The price is reasonable. It's not exorbitant. CrowdStrike and other players are on the higher side.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BigFix
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BigFix
4.3 out of 5
BigFix excels in patch management and endpoint visibility, making it a cost-effective choice with strong ROI. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint delivers advanced threat detection and automation capabilities, justifying its higher price. Tech buyers seeking cost efficiency may choose BigFix; those prioritizing features may prefer Cisco.
Download BigFix vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
BigFix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its extensive feature set.
View comparison
Pricing
BigFix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, reflecting its extensive feature set.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Huntress Managed EDR
4.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint provides comprehensive security with seamless integration into Cisco products. In comparison, Huntress Managed EDR offers proactive threat monitoring with 24/7 support, appealing to businesses seeking effective managed services. Both cater to different needs, from full integration to straightforward deployment.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Huntress Managed EDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a higher initial setup cost, while Huntress Managed EDR provides a more affordable entry point for small businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a higher initial setup cost, while Huntress Managed EDR provides a more affordable entry point for small businesses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Check Point Harmony Endpoint
4.4 out of 5
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is preferred for its anti-ransomware and zero-day protection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its XDR and threat hunting. Check Point Harmony Endpoint excels in deployment ease, while Cisco Secure Endpoint offers better long-term ROI despite higher costs.
Download Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Check Point Harmony Endpoint setup costs are lower compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which often requires a higher initial investment. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers additional features that may justify the higher expense for some users.
View comparison
Pricing
Check Point Harmony Endpoint setup costs are lower compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which often requires a higher initial investment. Cisco Secure Endpoint offers additional features that may justify the higher expense for some users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint
3.9 out of 5
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint excels in detection capabilities and forensic tools, making it a strong choice for thorough threat analysis. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced threat hunting and seamless integration with Cisco tools, appealing to those needing versatile features.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint Report
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint's setup cost is relatively high, while Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a lower upfront setup cost. This key difference may impact budget-conscious organizations when selecting between these endpoint security solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
VMware Carbon Black Endpoint's setup cost is relatively high, while Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a lower upfront setup cost. This key difference may impact budget-conscious organizations when selecting between these endpoint security solutions.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cynet
4.4 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cynet
4.4 out of 5
Cynet offers cost-effective pricing with reliable support and automated threat detection, ideal for small to mid-sized businesses. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint, with its advanced features and integration, attracts enterprises looking for comprehensive protection. Cisco's robust support helps mitigate its more complex deployment process.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cynet Report
Cynet has a lower initial setup cost, making it more budget-friendly, while Cisco Secure Endpoint, though more expensive initially, provides extensive features.
View comparison
Pricing
Cynet has a lower initial setup cost, making it more budget-friendly, while Cisco Secure Endpoint, though more expensive initially, provides extensive features.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR
4.2 out of 5
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR excels in pricing and support. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint offers comprehensive features and value. Bitdefender features effective threat detection and user-friendly management, whereas Cisco provides advanced analytics and detailed reporting. Customers appreciate Bitdefender's affordability and Cisco's long-term investment returns.
Download Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is praised for its relatively low setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial setup expenses. Bitdefender appeals to budget-conscious organizations, whereas Cisco caters to businesses ready to invest more upfront.
View comparison
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is praised for its relatively low setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is noted for its higher initial setup expenses. Bitdefender appeals to budget-conscious organizations, whereas Cisco caters to businesses ready to invest more upfront.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Microsoft Defender for Business
3.9 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers extensive integrations and robust threat prevention, appealing to those seeking comprehensive protection. In comparison, Microsoft Defender for Business integrates seamlessly with Microsoft services, ideal for businesses utilizing the Microsoft ecosystem. Pricing strategies and deployment options vary, catering to different organizational needs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Microsoft Defender for Business Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint involves a moderate setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Business offers a simpler and potentially lower-cost initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint involves a moderate setup cost, while Microsoft Defender for Business offers a simpler and potentially lower-cost initial setup.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is praised for its threat detection, response capabilities, and easy integration with other Cisco products. In comparison, Trellix ENS offers superior advanced threat intelligence and flexible policy management, justifying its higher cost and making it suitable for long-term investment.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) offers a more economical setup solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) offers a more economical setup solution.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Malwarebytes
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Malwarebytes
4.0 out of 5
Malwarebytes is highly rated for affordability and support, while Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in comprehensive security features, making it worth its higher price for many users. In comparison, Malwarebytes could improve performance impact and control options. Cisco Secure Endpoint users seek intuitive navigation and better alerts.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Malwarebytes Report
Malwarebytes setup cost is generally lower and easier to handle, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost but offers a more extensive configuration process. The price gap between the two highlights the difference in initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Malwarebytes setup cost is generally lower and easier to handle, whereas Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost but offers a more extensive configuration process. The price gap between the two highlights the difference in initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response
4.0 out of 5

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers intuitive design and real-time monitoring. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced malware protection and integration with other Cisco products. Cybereason simplifies management, while Cisco's extensive reporting aids security. Cybereason is cost-effective; Cisco's comprehensive feature set justifies higher costs.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Report
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response offers lower setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint has higher initial expenses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
4.1 out of 5
Panda Adaptive Defense 360 offers advanced threat detection and robust endpoint protection with minimal system impact. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with comprehensive threat intelligence and forensic analysis tools. Panda is praised for easy deployment, while Cisco provides deeper integration and advanced analytics.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 Report
Panda Adaptive Defense 360 has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint. The setup process for Cisco Secure Endpoint is relatively budget-friendly, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 involves a more significant initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Panda Adaptive Defense 360 has a higher setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint. The setup process for Cisco Secure Endpoint is relatively budget-friendly, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 involves a more significant initial investment.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Bitdefender Total Security
4.4 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is valued for its advanced threat detection and seamless integration with Cisco products. In comparison, Bitdefender Total Security offers comprehensive protection and features like a secure VPN. Cisco Secure Endpoint's superior customer service contrasts with Bitdefender Total Security's affordability and extensive coverage.
Download Bitdefender Total Security vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which provides a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Bitdefender Total Security, which provides a more budget-friendly option.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity
4.0 out of 5
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity appeals to those prioritizing low resource usage and AI-driven threat protection. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint stands out for its integration with other Cisco products and comprehensive security architecture, ideal for businesses within the Cisco ecosystem seeking robust threat intelligence.
Download BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cisco Secure Endpoint Report
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity typically incurs higher initial costs compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more cost-effective setup. The primary difference lies in setup expenses, which may influence preference based on budget considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity typically incurs higher initial costs compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more cost-effective setup. The primary difference lies in setup expenses, which may influence preference based on budget considerations.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint impresses with robust threat detection and integration features, complemented by strong customer support. In comparison, Datto EDR excels in ease of deployment and offers cost-effective ROI. Cisco may require customization, whereas Datto's straightforward deployment appeals to tech buyers.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a cost-effective setup with straightforward pricing, while Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a higher initial setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive feature set.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers a cost-effective setup with straightforward pricing, while Datto Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a higher initial setup cost, reflecting its comprehensive feature set.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Seqrite Endpoint Security
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint offers advanced threat detection and high-quality support services, making it suitable for organizations seeking robust security features. In comparison, Seqrite Endpoint Security provides cost-effective security with a user-friendly management console and efficient performance, appealing to budget-conscious buyers.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Seqrite Endpoint Security Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, whereas Seqrite Endpoint Security is generally seen as budget-friendly.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, whereas Seqrite Endpoint Security is generally seen as budget-friendly.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Digital Guardian
3.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Digital Guardian
3.7 out of 5
Digital Guardian offers strong data loss prevention, while Cisco Secure Endpoint provides advanced threat detection and endpoint visibility. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with robust threat management features. Digital Guardian benefits from competitive pricing and solid ROI. Both have user-friendly deployments and well-regarded customer service.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Digital Guardian Report
Digital Guardian has moderate setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Digital Guardian has moderate setup costs, while Cisco Secure Endpoint is known for higher initial expenses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform
4.3 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is valued for its integration capabilities and robust threat intelligence. In comparison, Deep Instinct offers proactive threat prevention with advanced machine learning. Cisco is noted for straightforward deployment and competitive pricing, while Deep Instinct attracts those seeking innovative security features and lower incident response costs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has lower setup costs compared to Deep Instinct Prevention Platform, which has higher setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has lower setup costs compared to Deep Instinct Prevention Platform, which has higher setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager
4.2 out of 5
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager offers robust protection with user-friendly integration, ideal for simpler setups. In comparison, Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with advanced threat detection, justifying its higher price for comprehensive features suitable for complex environments. Ivanti provides competitive pricing and good ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager Report
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable entry point for users.
View comparison
Pricing
Ivanti Endpoint Security for Endpoint Manager has a higher initial setup cost compared to Cisco Secure Endpoint, which offers a more affordable entry point for users.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection
4.0 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat detection and prevention, with smooth deployment and solid customer support. In comparison, WithSecure Elements offers quicker adaptability to new threats, strong post-deployment assistance, and long-term cost-effectiveness, despite its higher initial costs.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection offers a more cost-effective setup option. Cisco's higher initial investment reflects its comprehensive feature set, contrasting with WithSecure's affordability and streamlined implementation.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has moderate setup costs, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection offers a more cost-effective setup option. Cisco's higher initial investment reflects its comprehensive feature set, contrasting with WithSecure's affordability and streamlined implementation.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
3.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is renowned for its integration capabilities and real-time protection. In comparison, Trellix EDR excels in behavioral analytics and forensic abilities. Cisco's broad coverage benefits existing Cisco customers, while Trellix offers superior threat detection, justifying its higher cost with long-term ROI.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint is typically lauded for its straightforward and cost-effective setup, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) often encounters criticism for its higher initial setup costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint is typically lauded for its straightforward and cost-effective setup, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) often encounters criticism for its higher initial setup costs.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Morphisec
4.6 out of 5

Cisco Secure Endpoint is preferred for its extensive support and pricing structure. In comparison, Morphisec stands out with innovative features and a proactive approach. Cisco also has comprehensive threat detection, while Morphisec excels in lightweight protection.

Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Morphisec Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Morphisec, which is more affordable for small to medium businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost compared to Morphisec, which is more affordable for small to medium businesses.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Jamf Protect
4.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Jamf Protect
4.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels with its broad feature set and strong deployment support. In comparison, Jamf Protect offers superior integration with Apple devices. Cisco Secure Endpoint is preferable for diverse environments, while Jamf Protect is ideal for those focused on Apple ecosystems.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Jamf Protect Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, while Jamf Protect offers a more budget-friendly initial setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost, while Jamf Protect offers a more budget-friendly initial setup.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response
3.8 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint integrates advanced network security, appealing for its real-time threat protection. In comparison, Symantec EDR excels in detailed threat analysis and automation, attracting buyers with comprehensive features. Cisco prioritizes performance, while Symantec focuses on intuitive configuration and robust customer support.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has an affordable setup cost, while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response tends to be more expensive. Users often find Cisco's solution simpler to implement compared to Symantec's, which requires more resources.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has an affordable setup cost, while Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response tends to be more expensive. Users often find Cisco's solution simpler to implement compared to Symantec's, which requires more resources.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
N-able EDR
3.5 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
N-able EDR
3.5 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint is favored for its cost-effectiveness and smooth deployment. In comparison, N-able EDR's real-time monitoring and advanced features justify its higher cost. Cisco stands out in pricing and support, while N-able excels in sophisticated features and scalability.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. N-able EDR Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while N-able EDR offers a more budget-friendly setup.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher initial setup cost, while N-able EDR offers a more budget-friendly setup.
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CylanceOPTICS
3.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
CylanceOPTICS
3.7 out of 5
Cisco Secure Endpoint excels in comprehensive threat detection and real-time monitoring, offering better network integration. In comparison, CylanceOPTICS leverages AI-driven detection with low false-positive rates. Cisco's pricing and support are attractive, while CylanceOPTICS's advanced features justify its higher cost.
Download Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. CylanceOPTICS Report
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost than CylanceOPTICS, making it less budget-friendly for smaller businesses. CylanceOPTICS offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to organizations with tighter budget constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
Cisco Secure Endpoint has a higher setup cost than CylanceOPTICS, making it less budget-friendly for smaller businesses. CylanceOPTICS offers a more cost-effective setup, appealing to organizations with tighter budget constraints.

Related categories

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
Cisco Security Portfolio
OSZAR »