We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Deep Instinct vs. SentinelOne

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Cisco Secure Endpoint Logo
21,099 views|13,817 comparisons
Deep Instinct Logo
7,163 views|4,294 comparisons
SentinelOne Logo
44,387 views|30,121 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct vs. SentinelOne and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious.""It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device.""The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great.""The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it.""The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration.""Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP.""The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.""Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"The most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods.""The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users.""Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface.""This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product.""It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."

More Deep Instinct Pros »

"It has a one-click button that we can use to reverse all those dodgy changes made by the virus program and bring the system quickly back to what it was. That's one of the most important features.""Our clients have been able to survive a ransomware attack without even knowing that they had had files encrypted and automatically rolled back - even their Point of Sale (POS) system did not miss a beat and the business continued as normal without interruption.""In terms of the engines that SentinelOne uses, it has stopped various scripts from running and it's highlighted lateral movement that we weren't expecting.""The best thing SentinelOne has done for us is that it gives us insight into the endpoints. We never had insight into lateral movement threats before. Once a threat known as Qbot gets on the network, it actually spreads throughout sub-networks quickly. SentinelOne has detected that and saved our bacon. We were able to get in there and stop the threat, lock it down, and prevent it from actually spreading through. It would have been 50 or 60 computers. It had spread through in a few minutes. We have a lot of HIPAA data and FERPA data that we need to keep protected.""The best part of the agent is that users can't remove or disable it, so endpoints will be safe. I can control it from the portal. I can see when it's updated and I can push updates from the portal. The greatness of SentinelOne is that our end-users don't see anything to do with the agents. Some of them don't even know it's on their laptops. And that's a good thing.""Previously, we had some processes related to incident response which required more steps. We needed to upload to VirusTotal, Sandbox, et cetera. Now, this process is shortened because all of the information we need is already in SentinelOne. We can briefly analyze and even respond from one management console. If someone has SOC, using the API, they can control everything. It's very cool. I think this is the future.""The solution is powerful because we just have to update the agent by using the console, which is simple to do. I just select the endpoints and click "Update" on the console. That is it, because it is very easy to use.""Prevents ransomware getting through."

More SentinelOne Pros »

Cons
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself.""We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints.""Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that.""The technical support is very slow.""We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way.""We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment.""I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics.""The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"Some features are too resource intensive.""Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern.""Reporting on incidents needs improvement.""The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization.""If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."

More Deep Instinct Cons »

"The role-based access is in dire need of improvement. We actually discussed this on a roadmap call and were informed that it was coming, but then it was delayed. It limits the roles that you can have in the platform, and we require several custom roles. We work with a lot of third-parties whom we rely on for some of our IT services. Part of those are an external SOC function where they are over-provisioned in the solution because there isn't anything relevant for the level of work that they do.""It would be nice if the console stored data daily, so that you could look at a timeline of events on a machine over a period of time, and currently this is not possible.""We are now using an external monitoring tool to monitor the services of SentinelOne, because apparently they don't have any solution for that. When the SentinelOne agent is down, you can go to the interface and see a mark on SentinelOne that something is not correct or the server needs to be rebooted, but you will not get an alert. You will not be warned that there is an issue with the SentinelOne agent. I have found that a little bit disturbing, because then we need to use a third-party monitoring tool to make sure that all services of SentinelOne are up and running.""They have tiers of support like most companies do. For the first three years, we had the top tier of their support and we would get a response from a technician quickly. We didn't have many things we had to ask of them. They would be very quick. We are now one tier down from that. The SLA for us is no longer within an hour or two. It's within half a day or something like that. As far as if I do ask a question of them, it is a little slower than what it used to be. I understand that we're at a lesser tier, but sometimes it feels like that could be a little better. I have to preface that by specifying that we're no longer paying for their top tier support.""One of the areas which would benefit from being improved is the policies. There are still software programs where we need to manually program in the policies to tell the system, "This program is legitimate." Some level of AI-based automation in creating those policies would go a long way in improving the amount of time it takes to deploy the system.""It's good on Linux, and Windows is pretty good except that the Windows agents sometimes ask for a lot of resources on the endpoints. That could be in the fine-tuning for scanning. In Mac, they are complaining about the same problems, that it's using a lot of resources, but that could also be that we have to configure what it is scanning and what it should not scan. Currently it scans everything.""There is an area of improvement is agent health monitoring, which would give us the ability to cap and manage resources used by the SentinelOne agent. We had issues with this in our environment. We reached out to SentinelOne about it, and they were very prompt in adding it into their roadmap.""All they need to do to improve it is for it to grow further. The hackers don't sleep. If the hackers don't sleep, the solution continually needs to be updated. They need to keep ahead of the hackers."

More SentinelOne Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work.""Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.""There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization.""The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost.""The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing.""We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive.""Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."

More Deep Instinct Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Pricing is a bit of a pain point. That's where we have not been able to convince all of our customers to use SentinelOne. The pricing is still on the higher side. It's almost double the price, if not more, of a normal antivirus, such as NOD32, Kaspersky, or Symantec.""The licensing is comparable to other solutions in the market. The pricing is competitive.""You have to look at the kinds of problems you can end up with and the fact that you want security against them, and then SentinelOne is not expensive.""The pricing is very fair for the solution they provide.""The pricing level for this service and application was very interesting for us. I don't know exactly what the price was, but apparently it was a big surprise that the SOC was also included in our pricing model.""SentinelOne is more affordable than some competing products, and it's not overly expensive for what you're getting.""The pricing is very reasonable.""Our licensing fees are about $5 USD per endpoint, per month."

More SentinelOne Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
Top Answer: Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
Top Answer: The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
Top Answer: The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've… more »
Top Answer: Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You… more »
Top Answer: Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they… more »
Top Answer: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks.… more »
Top Answer: Which solution is better depends on which is more suitable specifically for your company. Darktrace, for example, is… more »
Top Answer: IMO, it depends on whether you have abilities to validate and/or correlate telemetries - these guys brings out quite a… more »
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Sentinel Labs
Learn More
Overview

Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

Deep Instinct is the first and only company applying end-to-end deep learning to cybersecurity. Deep learning is inspired by the brain’s ability to learn. Once a brain learns to identify an object, its identification becomes second nature. Similarly, as Deep Instinct’s artificial deep neural network brain learns to prevent any type of cyber threat, its prediction capabilities become instinctive. As a result, any kind of malware, known and new, first-seen malware, zero-days, ransomware and APT attacks from any kind are predicted and prevented in zero-time with unmatched accuracy and speed anywhere in the enterprise – Network, endpoint, Mobile – enabling multi-layered protection. To learn more, visit: https://www.deepinstinct.com.

SentinelOne delivers autonomous endpoint protection through a single agent that successfully prevents, detects, responds, and hunts attacks across all major vectors. Designed for extreme ease of use, the S1 platform saves customers time by applying AI to automatically eliminate threats in real-time for both on-premise and cloud environments and is the only solution to provide full visibility across networks directly from the endpoint. To learn more visit www.sentinelone.com or follow us at @SentinelOne, on LinkedIn or Facebook.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about Deep Instinct
Learn more about SentinelOne
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Information Not Available
Havas, Flex, Estee Lauder, McKesson, Norfolk Southern, JetBlue, Norwegian airlines, TGI Friday, AVX, Fim Bank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
University6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company26%
Comms Service Provider22%
Government6%
Financial Services Firm5%
REVIEWERS
Retailer19%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
Healthcare Company13%
Manufacturing Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider23%
Government5%
Retailer4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise52%
REVIEWERS
Small Business60%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise20%
REVIEWERS
Small Business29%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise54%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business24%
Midsize Enterprise52%
Large Enterprise25%
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct vs. SentinelOne and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Deep Instinct is ranked 30th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 5 reviews while SentinelOne is ranked 2nd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 20 reviews. Deep Instinct is rated 7.6, while SentinelOne is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Deep Instinct writes "A great threat-prevention solution that is light, simple to use, and easy to deploy and administer". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SentinelOne writes "Made a tremendous difference in our ability to protect our endpoints and servers". Deep Instinct is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Blackberry Protect, Carbon Black CB Defense and Tanium, whereas SentinelOne is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Carbon Black CB Defense, Darktrace and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Deep Instinct vs. SentinelOne report.

See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.