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
Webroot Endpoint Protection
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Webroot Endpoint Protection is the OpenText company's business class multi-vector endpoint protection application, providing centralized endpoint management, deep learning intelligence, and advanced behavioral analytics.
$150
per year per 5 seats
Pricing
Bitdefender GravityZone
Webroot Endpoint Protection
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
Business Endpoint Protection
$150.00
per year per 5 seats
Business Endpoint Protection
$690.00
per year per 25 seats
Business Endpoint Protection
Contact sales team
per 50+ seats
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitdefender GravityZone
Webroot Endpoint Protection
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
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
Webroot Endpoint Protection
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 …
We chose Webroot Endpoint Protection for its lightweight, cloud-based management and minimal impact on system performance. Compared to other solutions we tested and used, Webroot Endpoint Protection offers quick deployment, strong malware protection, and low overhead, making it …
Webroot is good in a way that it is an all encompassing solution one stop shop for protecting endpoints but it needs to be managed and licensed. Some users do not need constant protection or need to have it on their machines in where the combination of Field Effect and …
I use them both. Webroot Endpoint Protection is deployed at the corporate level, but ThreatDown is added at the unit level. If I could only choose 1, Webroot Endpoint Protection would not be it. But, as I said, its price vs. performance ration might be superior to ThreatDown.
We found other products to be able to detect malware and malicious URL's better than Webroot Endpoint Protection. Thus, we moved away from Webroot Endpoint Protection. Also, over the years, there were at least 2 big mistakes by Webroot, where our business applications were …
Microsoft Defender is very different from Webroot Endpoint Protection. To explain, Webroot Endpoint Protection must be installed locally for all devices. Microsoft has a local installation for Defender for Windows PCs. What is different is how Microsoft Defender runs on the …
Less system intensive than Symantec, with a much better management setup on the backend. More robust than Microsoft Defender, though a little heavier on the resources required, but the feature comparison is night and day between the two. Defender does nicely integrate with the …
We would consider Webroot in the top 5 when you factor in ease of use, level of protection, and cost. Probably not as comprehensive as other end-point security solutions but the proper level of functionality and support for our needs. Question what impact the acquisition by …
Both Avast and Norton have caused issues with their impact on system performance. Avast recently caused a major lag on a client-server, and Symantec slows down our systems so much that we ended up recommending more memory than was generally needed.
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection does not hog system resources like Norton and other products do. You don't even know it's running. A look in the task manager will show it's very low on the resource list.
Webroot Endpoint Protection compares well to the other products listed. Viper, GFI and Symantec are a lot more intrusive and bloated compared to Webroot. The installation is more streamlined as well. The interface is streamlined and not full of fluff as to compared with …
Some of the other options available to us were less expensive than Webroot Endpoint Protection. Still, either required too much management on our end didn't offer multi-platform protection or didn't have all of the features we were looking for.
With Webroot, installation is quick and doesn't require a reboot, definitions are always up-to-date without lengthy definition downloads, and the footprint makes it unnoticeable to clients. This can't be said about the other products I have used. Something would inevitably …
Webroot Endpoint Protection beats the competition in various aspects. Webroot provides an easy web portal management of protected devices. Installation occurs very easily on all devices. Furthermore, the price to protect a workstation vs a server is one and the same.
I can tell you that the Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is much better than the competition in three primary areas. Number one; they are the smallest footprint so as not to decrease the performance of the endpoint. Number two; Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is very …
Webroot is extremely light on the system resources and incredibly quick to install. From what I've seen it's just as good for malware as Kaspersky and ESET.
Way too heavy of an application. Webroot is a lot lighter and easier to use. Kaspersky overloads the system and pops up at the worst possible time, while Webroot just runs in the background doing its thing.
Webroot has been a much better asset both financially and in overall general use. Compared to Avast and Kaspersky, its been a much better decision that fits into our budget, and compared to Norton, it definitely uses a lot less resources on the endpoint. Norton tended to make …
I think that the AV clients are more light weight than the others which makes running on older slower computers more manageable. Also Cloud manamgenet is a huge, huge plus.
We looked at Kaspersky, Bitdefender, Norton. Webroot is usually No.1 or 2 based on ratings and user reviews/feedback. Easy to deploy and managability were also key to choosing Webroot.
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.
The software tends to do a good job of basic protection but is not the best for larger clients and is not as powerful as some others offered on the market today. The support is not the best either, have had a hard time getting assistance in the past trying to resolve issues.
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.
Webroot Endpoint Protection works very well at blocking threats quickly and can undo changes if a file turns out to be harmful, which has helped us in the past.
It runs quietly in the background without slowing down endpoints, even during scans, which is great.
You can manage all your devices from one online dashboard, making it easy to set rules and see security alerts. One pane of glass is always great.
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 was missing detections. We found a better product that detects more malware.
Deploying the endpoint agents was easy, but deploying Web Threat Shield was not and users could disable that functionality.
When you deactivated old endpoints, they were put in an "inactive" category. You could not then delete the "inactive" endpoints. For someone who likes to keep things clean, this was annoying.
I found the rollout of endpoint agent updates to be rather slow.
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 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.
It does what it needs to do but we have noticed that malware is sort of uncommon and we have started to switch to other solutions of combating malware and suspicious activity such as using products like ThreatLocker and Field Effect, combined with things like malware bytes to perform scans when needed.
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.
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 has been reliable up to this point. A request can easily be generated via the console and support responding in a reasonable time. We have not had any major issues other than the basic agents not communicating with the console and the like.
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.
I had some difficulties with remote users. I ended up needing to open a remote tech support session and finish the process. Other than a few speed bumps, I was impressed with the engineering of the install. Because of time differences, I was done installing in two days. The cost, per license, could be less.
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.
We would consider Webroot in the top 5 when you factor in ease of use, level of protection, and cost. Probably not as comprehensive as other end-point security solutions but the proper level of functionality and support for our needs. Question what impact the acquisition by OpenText is having on future development and support. OpenText also acquire Carbonite for back-up support.
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.