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
Symantec Endpoint Security
Score 6.3 out of 10
N/A
Symantec Endpoint Protection is the company's flagship antivirus / endpoint security product.
$29.99
1 year 100-249 devices
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone
Symantec 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
Endpoint Security, Initial Hybrid Subscription License With Support
$29.99
1 year 100-249 devices
Symantec Endpoint Security Enterprise, Initial Hybrid Subscription License with Support
$34.99
1 year 1-99 devices
Endpoint Security, Initial Hybrid Subscription License With Support
$90.99
3 years 100-249 devices
Symantec Endpoint Security Enterprise, Initial Hybrid Subscription License with Support
$99.99
3 years 1-99 devices
Symantec Endpoint Security Complete, Initial Hybrid Subscription License with Support
$200
3 years 1-99 devices
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitdefender GravityZone
Symantec 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
Symantec 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 …
Symantec Endpoint Security seems to be a more mature solution compared with CrowdStrike, particularly when CS was just recently getting their USB blocking functionality rolled out for macOS endpoints this year. Another differentiator with CrowdStrike is that Symantec ES still …
Symantec Endpoint Security offers very similar features to the above products, they all do the same thing in terms of protecting your endpoints against cybersecurity threats. Installation wise the products all install from a central management system and report back to this for …
Symantec Endpoint Security stacks up very well against the competition. One thing that is very different about Symantec compared to the competitors is that Symantec will not steal all your PC resources and will run fine with most applications. Some other AV products are …
We've completed a POV on Crowdstrike Falcom Endpoint Protect and are very excited to move over to that platform and away from the Symantec protect suite. Crowdstrike has behavior based analysis and scanning, vulnerability detection, and best of bread support and managed …
In comparison with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Symantec Endpoint Security has, in my opinion, more scalable file inspection/spyware/antivirus settings. Plus it is more stable in a multi-OS user environment. But it also has numerous issues with itself and related Symantec …
Cylance: (Active Engage) (Cost 4x Symantec [Endpoint Security]) Cylance is a good product but we have it through an MSSP and only have read-only. The certification and training for the entry [are] like 3 hours of videos but a smart person can just go in and look as the system …
We have evaluated McAfee, it degrades the performance of computers and also the feature set were not properly working, it also lacked the key features that we require, the cost is also higher, on other hand we also evaluated Microsoft system center endpoint protection it has …
Symantec Endpoint Production is hands down my least favorite endpoint projection software on the market today. It's a difficult endpoint to deploy, manage and remove. It's a heavy client so once you get it installed it consumes a large amount of resources on the endpoint. …
I have used competing software from different vendors such as McAfee, Eset, and Trend Micro. I found that Symantec Endpoint Security distributes its updates flawlessly and sends a very clear and comprehensive daily report. I also find the customer service very helpful once it …
Systems Administrator, Core Infrastructure & Microsoft Systems
Chose Symantec Endpoint Security
Symantec Endpoint Protection really shines against its competitors when it comes to centralized management. It falls a little short when it comes to cloud deployments.
More robust options and protections than Malware Bytes. Better overall detection and alerting to security issues. The overall ROI was better for us and we felt would also give us a stronger line of defense in our overall security strategy. We chose Symantec Endpoint because it …
Symantec Endpoint Protection outperformed all other competitor front-line antivirus products with more accurate signature detections and less false positives. We ultimately chose to pair SEP with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware to provide a more comprehensive security solution that …
I have used Symantec Endpoint Protection for many years successfully. I truthfully have not compared it to any of the other major alternatives out there, as Symantec Endpoint Protection has continued to get the job done.
Eset is better for on-premises integration. You install the administration console on a local machine, unlike Symantec Endpoint Protection, which is entirely cloud-based, and you can scan your network and perform silent installs. They seem to have a reasonable level when it …
We did use a mix of Symantec and ClamWin AV and after that a mix of Symantec and AVG for our store locations. We also tested Comodo and McAfee at one point. McAfee was too expensive for our budget and Comodo I believe just didn't deploy to our store locations easily. We did …
Our company has used both the Norton and Symantec systems for years. Therefore, I have never used any other system. We are so pleased with Symantec and have never seen a need to use any other programs.
The company decided to opt for Symantec Endpoint Protection because of efficiency and what it promises to do. Besides being an investment which has been used for more than 10 years. For any and all problems, the software presents a solution at the time, in addition to sending …
Symantec Endpoint Protection stacks up well against its competitors. It's priced very competitively. It's easy to install. Most important of all it catches viruses and prevents them from attacking one's computer.
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.
We have found that Symantec Endpoint Security is better suited to newer systems running faster processors and more than 8GB RAM otherwise the client agent takes up too many resources and slows the system down. However, if you have a reasonably modern fleet of systems it does everything you would expect from an Endpoint Protection solution and works well as part of a multi-layered cybersecurity policy.
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.
Removing dead clients from the console. This is nearly impossible to do, and makes keeping the console clean a very difficult task.
Poorly tested versions are sometimes released that cause serious issues for users. This ranges from browsers malfunctioning to BSOD errors.
Malware detection is good but not great. We are not confident in SEP by itself to neutralize malware threats. It's detection rate just isn't high enough for next generation and zero day threats.
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
Continued satisfied support. The saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it..." comes to mind. It works, and we'll continue to use it and support Symantec.
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.
The rating reflects Symantec Endpoint Security's ability to balance enterprise grade security with user-friendly workflows or advanced configurations require extra effort. For most organizations, the streamlined management and robust automation justify the high score. Management GUI is old fashined and need to be improve. Older devices may experience slowdowns during full scans without careful configuration.
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.
We've used it for years and the software is easy to use. The dashboard is easy to read, and you can easily figure out where to go to troubleshoot or deploy software. Symantec is there for emergencies like backup restoration or file retrieval. It's pretty low maintenance. Symantec is there when your IT infrastructure needs it
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.
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.
Support is completely awful! You can never get anyone to help if you can even find a number to call. The support web portal is a joke and their response time if you're even able to submit a ticket is ridiculously slow.
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.
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.
Symantec Endpoint Security seems to be a more mature solution compared with CrowdStrike, particularly when CS was just recently getting their USB blocking functionality rolled out for macOS endpoints this year. Another differentiator with CrowdStrike is that Symantec ES still provides both on-demand scanning & real-time signature-based detection in addition to solely real-time machine learning detection whereas on-demand scanning and signatures are not available on CrowdStrike. This means there is a doubt as to whether we can use CS to comply with some of our PCI DSS obligations which specifically require the use of signature-based antivirus solutions.
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.
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.