Bitdefender GravityZone combines multiple security services into a single platform to reduce the cost of building a trusted environment for endpoints.
$284.99
per year 10 devices
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
Kaspersky Small Office Security (formerly Kaspersky Work Space Security) is antivirus / endpoint security software from Russian company Kaspersky.
$29.99
per month
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Editions & Modules
GravityZone Small Business Security
$284.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security
$369.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security Premium
$814.99
per year 10 devices
GravityZone Business Security Premium
Contact Sales
GravityZone Business Security Enterprise
Contact Sales
GravityZone XDR
Contact Sales
Essential Suite
$29.99
per month
Advanced Suite
$39.99
per month
Premium Suite
$44.99
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
5 device license purchase minimum. Discounts available for multi-year subscriptions. 1st year discounts available (up to 30% off displayed price).
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Bitdefender GravityZone
Kaspersky Endpoint Security
Considered Both Products
Bitdefender GravityZone
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Bitdefender GravityZone
Bitdefender GravityZone was the best for both ease of use and cost. Their pricing model outweigh most others as its a very low cost per unit per month.
Bitdefender was more of a robust solution than Webroot. It offers many more granular configurations than the competition but also includes more complexity to get it all set up and find how to configure all the additional features.
Much better company and product. In my experience, we got completely ripped off when broadcom bought Symantec and were told our 3 year licenses are now only 1 year licenses with no refund. Also was a much more seamless install and has caught way more threats than symantec ever …
Bitdefender offered the largest number of tools with the smallest footprint of any providers we have tested and used. The cloud platform is very well thought out and will give us all the information we need very quickly. Resources required have been greatly reduced, both on …
I find that Bitdefender GravityZone is more resilient to attack than the Norton product. I've been out to too many machines that have been compromised with the Norton Antivirus product on them. I trust Bitdefender to protect the device effectively against threats better than …
I've a lot of experience with many EDR among the best in the market. In an incident response phase we usually test the malware detected against many EDR's and Bitdefender GravityZone is the only one that always detect the threat. Being constantly updated with the latest …
We found Bitdefender to be better. In our attempts to infect a test Windows 10 VM's we could not get around Bitdefender. Additionally, we have not had any complaints about performance once installed. That was not the case with Symantec.
I think these days all of the products are extremely quick at updating the definitions as soon as they come out. Bitdefender is no different. It updates and catches threats on our endpoints and alerts the user with a very visible pop-up warning. It also quarantines threats …
It's night and day between Kaspersky and Bitdefender [GravityZone]. We previously used Kaspersky both internally and throughout our customer base. It was a resource hog and allowed many threats to get through. It never updated properly and was in my opinion, a piece of junk. …
Bitdefender GravityZone beats all other competitors. It runs with a very small footprint, yet catches anything thrown at it. We will never change AV providers.
We tested many different antivirus programs before deciding to go with Bitdefender GravityZone. Bitdefender [GravityZone] caught numerous threats that made it through the other AVs. It also uses considerably fewer system resources than its competitors.
While most anti-virus/threat management software is highly effective, Bitdefender [GravityZone] consistently ranks as best in class when it comes to threat management. The [sheer] fact that of the nearly 100 computers I manage, not a single one has experienced a virus outbreak …
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.
We have not regretted moving to Bitdefender GravityZone. It's much easier to manage and the product is less noticeable on the machines it is installed. There are very little false positives and up till now we have not had any outbreaks of viruses in the company. They were …
I believe it’s pretty effective compared to others. Bitdefender GravityZone does have robust protection. Having used Carbon Black and Kaspersky, all solutions are pretty reliable and top tier.
We were using McAfee and it just caused issue after issue and so now with BD GZ we do not have to worry about machine lock up or even the issues of updates as BD keep the software updated with the latest information that we need to ensure our customer are protected.
They all seem to do a decent job at stopping attacks, but for the cost and features I felt I could not go wrong selecting Bitdefender while I was comparing the others.
Detection of the others is more basic and less layered. Also, the lack of add-on modules, especially EDR, is a deal breaker. Most of all, the centralized management with a cloud console is lacking and therefore hardware is required.
Very effective. As mentioned previously, the product just works. We have had no threats that were not taken care of by GravityZone. Previous alternatives had failed on a number of levels, requiring a lot of additional remediation/repair.
When compared to Trend Micro Worry Free Business Security software, Bitdefender GravityZone is just as good or better. We have not had any software or security issues while using either so it is difficult to say which one responds to and handles threats better. I do like both …
When it comes down to it, I feel that both Bitdefender GravityZone and Sophos achieve the same results, and that's what really matters. My personal opinion is that Sophos provides a much more robust console that makes a lot more sense when navigating. I've often gotten so lost …
Cisco is very complicated to use in my opinion and this leads to some operational doubts when you have to manage sensitive and critical operations. with Kaspersky there's more trust perception and a feeling that everything is going the right way and as expected. Cisco AMP can't …
Other cybersecurity products we've tested only detect a few malware. They are not cost-effective as they have separate licenses for other features. Other vendors no longer support the old version of the OS. This is very important to us as we still have legacy OS in place. To …
Offers equal or greater protection against current threats, stays updated. Its license is cheaper than the competition (i.e. EPDR) and financiers really like this.
Kaspersky Endpoint Security has less impact on computer memory and processing. On the other hand, I think the solution is much more advanced and more powerful overall. Both solutions have a central management console, but Kaspersky's solution has better usability and provides …
In terms of management, it it much more difficult to cloud manage Kaspersky versus Webroot. Also, as stated before, much easier to make exceptions to virus definitions and scanning.
one of the best antivirus software I have used with a much friendly interface and is easy to manage as compared to other security products. As an admin, We have managed many security tasks in an organization. It does come in handy for such tasks without any hassle.
Kaspersky was chosen over other competitors for it's benefits. As Kaspersky is a fully fledge solution for encryption, patch management, OS deployment, Device control, web control, application whitelisting and endpoint protection.
There are lots of reasons for choosing this endpoint security system. It is a very efficient tool in terms of
identifying viruses. The biggest benefit is that it always keeps me away from
opening harmful or suspicious sites. This is the most affordable security product.
I've used the cloud version of CarbonBlack and Bitdefender. They both say they automatically scan files as soon as they appear on your computer. The user/administrator is left to trust that the technology works. With Bitdefender, it at least allows an on-demand scan, but it …
Kaspersky Endpoint Security was chosen because it has very high reliability and an easy to use graphical interface. It also has excellent technical support, and in evaluations, it met all the technical requirements that the management needed. The software protects against the …
The Central Security Center for the Symantec Endpoint Protection product that was previously being used was horrible and the client programs were a huge drain on system resources. The workstation resources were overloaded when this program was running and rendered the …
Kaspersky is a leader in endpoint protection, but its ties to potential adversaries are unsettling. Kaspersky has a great threat research team and quickly identifies malicious software and its signature. Its web-based protection is also top notch. This is a great product but as …
It is one of the best anti-virus products that I have used. Much more friendly user interface. It is way easier to implement and install. It is also way easier to manage through the MMC. The console is Microsoft like and very intuitive to any system admin who has run consoles …
Kaspersky adds another layered approach to defense that continues to protect and provide ongoing operations. The suite of products within the solution continue to provide solid proactive threat detection and prevention actions, centralized enterprise controls make management …
System Center is more robust than Kaspersky Security Center. They both offer a single pane of glass for remote management of Endpoints (at the Advanced level for Kaspersky). Kaspersky does an excellent job of providing 3rd party applications in packages that can be downloaded …
I tried both Avast and Avira and the annoying pop ups to upgrade and being locked behind a paywall made buying Kaspersky a no brainer, especially when I have seen it first hand protect our data. The interface for all 3 was lacking in some sort of way but the Kaspersky UI was …
I used Norton for almost 10 years, always reliable and never had a big problem with the features or offerings. Kaspersky won me over with its speed, mobility and much more reliable nature. Norton had a nasty habit of uninstalling programs it didn't want, even though they were …
Kaspersky Endpoint Security often comes up on top of other competitor products for a variety of reasons. These include overall speed, easy to user interface, lower costs for implementation, and easy to manage features. It has a great security research department to deal with …
We looked at other solutions and chose Kaspersky over the other software out there as the price point on a multiyear contract was aggressive and the software running on the computers as the agent was thin and didn't use up much system resources. We also like that Kasperksy has …
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.
Anytime you are managing multiple servers and workstations on a network, having a good Security Center to assist with that management is critical. Kaspersky Security Center provides that and gives the administrator the tools and reports necessary to properly manage and monitor these systems across a network. This is a VERY useful tool and it makes my job much easier.
The Gravity Zone console is quite easy to use, particularly if the person assigned to implement and deploy have a good understanding of how to make it work to get at the information needed.
The Dashboard is customizable to get at the information needed in one location.
Pushing tasks across the network is quite easy.
Having said the what is available in gravity zone, it is easy to see what devices have activity that frequently result in quarantines. This allows us to address "misuse" of our devices. Which brings me to my final point...
The policies can be set up to lock devices down with very strict rules (such as device locking) or with relaxed policies.
I wish we could access logs from the cloud-based product. Not just in a viewable sense but from a download so that we can scrape them for interesting strings.
Bitdefender needs to make it easier to export data from the web interface. As it stands now, it's a time-consuming copy and paste activity.
I would like for there to a notification service when someone encounters malware. For example, an email to our IT team when someone's Bitdefender quarantines a file.
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 product is stable and accurate in detecting security threats. There are very few or no false positives in detecting security threats or unusual behavior and has very sharp heuristics. The product does the job very well including saving us money in getting 3rd party patch management tools as the business is already using Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager which is Microsoft product specific and the product patches these third party products e.g Adobe Flash Player
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.
I will give Kaspersky a score of 9 out of 10 for scalability, as it allows businesses to easily expand their security infrastructure. This means it won't cost them a lot to add further protection and security. It won't also require them to purchase other hardware and services for their required protection.
Yes its very available. The software continues to protect you even if you are offline. It constantly runs in the background and will check for updates again once back online.
I've used the on-premise server. I've only experienced one time that we couldn't open the console, and that was a server issue. It seems to be a dependable solution. It's there, and it's stable.
The console is quite fast and responsive, and once you start to get used to it, it is easy to use and you can see the main dashboard status at a glance. You can then dig deeper into the individual Companies / Endpoint clients and check the status of each. The software itself is not heavy on system resources in each PC.
Users don't notice any slowdown with the antivirus running on their systems. There have been issues when the systems have missed a scheduled scan, and it was checked to run at [a] first available time, they will start a full scan at startup. This has caused some lag. Normally there are also some issues with the workstation, but it is something to note.
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.
I give the maximum grade because we have no complaints; we never had any failure, serious error, and serious threat to the company. All of its features work very well. The great advantage of having a product supported by an industry-leading security company is that regularly updated security protocols will protect the system against all emerging threats.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
Make sure to provide awareness campaigns on changes that will be implemented and WHY the business is doing it and the benefits reaped. Benefits reaped is very important for the justification of why things have to change and emphasizing the importance of security. This will reduce user disgruntlement and total bitterness on use of their workstation or laptop
Bitdefender offered the largest number of tools with the smallest footprint of any providers we have tested and used. The cloud platform is very well thought out and will give us all the information we need very quickly. Resources required have been greatly reduced, both on Endpoints and in the day-to-day management of the product. We also gained Patch management and vulnerability scanning as part of the switch, which has enabled us to keep on top of updates, making the environment more secure.
I've used the cloud version of CarbonBlack and Bitdefender. They both say they automatically scan files as soon as they appear on your computer. The user/administrator is left to trust that the technology works. With Bitdefender, it at least allows an on-demand scan, but it still never reports to the user if the file was clean. Kaspersky automatically scans and notifies the user that it has been scanned AND the results of the scan. In IT we know we can't always trust the technology to perform as designed. I NEED confirmation to feel at ease. Kaspersky makes it easy to run an on-demand scan of a workstation if there is suspicion of an infection. Another thing is that I have not [seen] in Bitdefender, and I know CarbonBlack does not provide inventory information for the administrators like Kasperky. Kaspersky gives detailed information about the systems it scan and lists every software installed. You can even filter and search for specific installations in your network through the Kaspersky Server Center (KSC). It helps know what licenses are used and where.
I give it this rating because one you have the console running, you can add or remove whole companies, add computer endpoints (and remove them), and easily create and deploy endpoint packages to the machines that need the software. Once installed, the software starts to report back to the Bitdefender servers and the number of active licences is then seen and billed.
You can create groups and create different policies for each group. You can customize many parts of the software before it is deployed. You can create different tasks and schedules based on the groups. It is customizable.
Estimating the ROI with Bitdefender [GravityZone] is rather difficult. While there is an obvious cost to using Bitdefender [GravityZone] (via a monthly or yearly subscription fee for each device being protected), it is hard to estimate the cost of if a computer or computers become infected via a piece of malware. In the best-case scenario, a single computer becomes infected with a relatively benign piece of malware that can be removed after infection; in a worst-case scenario, an entire infrastructure is infected by ransomware completely crippling an organization.
Since implementing Bitdefender [GravityZone] across multiple organizations, not a single one has [added] a malware outbreak.
The initial cost of setup and the cost of maintenance is more than worth it for if nothing more than peace of mind.