Bitdefender GravityZone MSP Review

Last updated: April 2026

Affiliate Disclosure: We may earn a commission when you purchase through our links. This does not affect our editorial independence.

Quick Answer

CrowdStrike showed 100% detection and protection scores with zero false positives in MITRE Engenuity tests, demonstrating strong breach prevention capabilities.
SentinelOne achieved only a 50% protection score and had 7 false positives in a recent MITRE Engenuity test it participated in.
CrowdStrike users report less hours to maintain their platform compared to SentinelOne, indicating lower operational overhead for MSPs.
SentinelOne elected to withdraw from the most recent MITRE Engenuity evaluation after MITRE revealed its cross-domain scope and complexity.

Managed Service Providers (MSPs) need endpoint security solutions that deliver both robust protection and operational efficiency. When evaluating options, understanding how leading platforms perform in real-world scenarios and testing is crucial. For instance, CrowdStrike has demonstrated superior breach prevention, achieving 100% detection and protection scores with zero false positives in MITRE Engenuity tests. In contrast, SentinelOne recorded a 50% protection score and produced 7 false positives in its most recent MITRE Engenuity test, suggesting a potentially higher burden on Security Operations Center (SOC) teams. Operational differences are also significant; CrowdStrike users report spending less time on platform maintenance, thanks to its lightweight agent and automated updates. These factors directly impact an MSP's ability to protect clients effectively and manage their security services profitably.

How Do Leading Endpoint Security Solutions Compare?

Leading endpoint security solutions like CrowdStrike and SentinelOne offer different approaches to threat detection and prevention, which directly impacts their efficacy for MSPs. CrowdStrike's platform leverages AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and integrated threat intelligence to deliver strong breach prevention. This approach has been independently validated, with CrowdStrike achieving 100% detection and protection scores and zero false positives in MITRE Engenuity tests. This level of performance means MSPs can rely on the platform to stop attacks without generating a flood of unnecessary alerts, a critical factor for managing multiple client environments.

On the other hand, SentinelOne's detection engine, which relies on supervised machine learning (ML), may struggle with more advanced threats. This includes sophisticated fileless and credential-based attacks, which often bypass traditional signature-based or basic ML detections. In its most recent MITRE Engenuity test participation, SentinelOne only achieved a 50% protection score and generated 7 false positives. This indicates a potential gap in its ability to prevent breaches autonomously and could lead to more manual intervention from an MSP's security team. The difference in these scores highlights a significant divergence in their ability to protect endpoints effectively.

CrowdStrike's AI-Powered Protection

CrowdStrike utilizes AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) to identify and stop threats. These IOAs are combined with integrated threat intelligence to provide unmatched breach prevention. The platform's use of unsupervised machine learning helps detect stealthy attacks and reduces false positives, which is crucial for efficient security operations. This means the system learns to identify malicious behavior without constant human retraining, adapting to new threats as they emerge. MSPs benefit from this proactive and precise detection, as it minimizes the risk of breaches for their clients and reduces the time spent investigating benign alerts.

The effectiveness of CrowdStrike's approach is evident in its independent testing results. It achieved perfect scores in MITRE Engenuity evaluations, with 100% detection and protection and zero false positives. This performance suggests a highly reliable and accurate security solution that can operate with minimal false alarms, allowing MSPs to focus on genuine threats and strategic security initiatives rather than alert fatigue.

SentinelOne's Supervised-ML Limitations

SentinelOne's detection engine relies on supervised-ML, which can be less effective against advanced and evolving threats. This method requires human labeling of data to train the model, meaning it might miss novel attack techniques that haven't been seen before. Consequently, the platform may struggle to identify sophisticated threats such as fileless attacks, which execute malicious code directly in memory without writing to disk, or credential-based threats, which exploit stolen user credentials.

The limitations of this approach were reflected in SentinelOne's MITRE Engenuity test results, where it recorded only a 50% protection score and produced 7 false positives. This lower protection score and higher false positive rate can lead to a less secure environment and increased workload for SOC teams. MSPs using such a solution might find themselves dedicating more resources to validating alerts and responding to incidents that should have been prevented.

Agent Deployment and Platform Integration

CrowdStrike offers a single, lightweight agent that deploys all platform modules. This agent installs quickly, even across hundreds of thousands of endpoints, streamlining the deployment process for MSPs managing diverse client environments. The unified agent approach simplifies management and ensures that all security functionalities are delivered efficiently without heavy resource consumption on client machines.

In contrast, SentinelOne's agent is described as heavy, potentially consuming significant resources and impacting endpoint performance. A resource-intensive agent can lead to slower system performance for end-users, causing frustration and potentially affecting business productivity. For MSPs, this could translate into more support calls related to performance issues, adding to operational overhead. The choice between a lightweight and a heavy agent can significantly influence client satisfaction and the overall efficiency of an MSP's service delivery.

What Are the Operational Differences for MSPs?

Operational efficiency is a key consideration for MSPs when choosing an endpoint security solution. The differences in agent management, updates, and overall maintenance between platforms like CrowdStrike and SentinelOne can significantly impact an MSP's workload and profitability. CrowdStrike is designed for effortless operation, with its update process eliminating operational workload for customers. This ensures that every endpoint always has the latest capabilities and protection without cumbersome tuning. This streamlined approach allows MSPs to manage client security with fewer manual tasks, freeing up valuable time and resources.

Conversely, SentinelOne's platform can be harder to maintain and operationalize. Its heavy agent consumes significant resources, potentially impacting endpoint performance, which can lead to client complaints and increased support tickets. Furthermore, SentinelOne often requires manual agent updates, driving up the operational burden for MSPs. Manual exclusions are also frequently needed for software interoperability issues, creating potential blind spots for adversaries and demanding constant vigilance from security teams. These factors contribute to a higher total cost of ownership and greater strain on an MSP's operational capacity.

Effortless Operation with CrowdStrike

CrowdStrike's design prioritizes ease of use and minimal operational burden. Its single, lightweight agent is capable of deploying all platform modules. This agent can be installed in minutes, even across hundreds of thousands of endpoints, making mass deployments quick and efficient for MSPs. The lightweight nature of the agent means it consumes minimal system resources, ensuring that client endpoints maintain optimal performance without noticeable slowdowns.

A significant advantage for MSPs is CrowdStrike's automated update process. This process eliminates the need for manual intervention, ensuring that every endpoint always has the latest security capabilities and protection. There's no cumbersome tuning required, which means MSPs don't have to spend time configuring or troubleshooting updates. This automation translates into less hours to maintain the platform, allowing MSPs to manage more clients with the same staff and focus on higher-value security services.

SentinelOne's Maintenance Challenges

SentinelOne's platform has been noted for being harder to maintain and operationalize. The agent itself is described as heavy, which can consume significant system resources. This resource consumption can potentially impact endpoint performance, leading to slower machines and frustrated end-users. For MSPs, performance issues can result in increased support calls and a negative impact on client satisfaction.

Manual agent updates are another challenge associated with SentinelOne. These manual updates add to the operational burden, requiring MSPs to dedicate time and effort to ensure all client endpoints are up-to-date. This process can be particularly taxing for MSPs managing a large number of clients or endpoints. Additionally, SentinelOne often requires manual exclusions for software interoperability issues. These exclusions are necessary to prevent the security software from interfering with other legitimate applications but can create blind spots for adversaries if not managed carefully. This increases the complexity of management and the potential for security gaps.

Impact on SOC Teams

The operational differences also extend to how SOC teams manage alerts and investigations. CrowdStrike's AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and integrated threat intelligence provide curated alert context, leading to faster investigations. The platform uses unsupervised machine learning to find stealthy attacks and specifically aims to cut out false positives that drain a SOC team's time. This precision helps security analysts focus on genuine threats, improving efficiency and reducing alert fatigue.

In contrast, SentinelOne's high false positive rate can bury SOC teams in a mountain of alerts. When a security solution frequently flags legitimate activity as malicious, analysts must spend considerable time triaging and investigating these false alarms. This not only wastes valuable resources but can also lead to fatigue, where real threats might be overlooked amidst the noise. The difference in false positive rates directly impacts the productivity and effectiveness of an MSP's security operations center.

Does SentinelOne's Approach to Threats Affect Efficacy?

SentinelOne's approach to threat response, particularly its reliance on "rollback" as a primary remediation strategy, raises questions about its overall efficacy and ability to guarantee complete remediation. While rollback can restore a system to a previous clean state, it may not address the root cause of an infection or fully remove all traces of an advanced threat. This can leave lingering vulnerabilities or components that could allow an attacker to regain access. In contrast, CrowdStrike focuses on proven breach prevention, aiming to stop attacks before they can cause damage, and uses unsupervised machine learning to detect stealthy attacks and reduce false positives.

Independent testing has also shed light on the efficacy differences. SentinelOne recorded the lowest total accuracy in the SE Labs 2024 Endpoint Security Enterprise test. This result suggests a less robust overall performance compared to other leading solutions. Furthermore, SentinelOne elected to withdraw from the most recent MITRE Engenuity evaluation after MITRE revealed its cross-domain scope and complexity. This withdrawal can be interpreted as an indication of concerns about its ability to perform effectively under the rigorous and comprehensive testing conditions of the evaluation.

The "Rollback" Strategy

SentinelOne's response strategy often relies on a "rollback" mechanism. This feature is designed to undo malicious changes made to a system by restoring it to a state prior to the attack. While this can be useful for recovering from certain types of incidents, such as ransomware, it may not guarantee full remediation. Advanced threats can be complex, involving multiple stages, persistence mechanisms, and lateral movement across a network. A simple rollback on an infected endpoint might not remove all artifacts of the attack, leaving the environment vulnerable to re-infection or further compromise.

For MSPs, relying heavily on rollback as the primary response means that the initial breach may not be truly prevented, only cleaned up after the fact. This reactive approach contrasts with proactive prevention strategies that aim to stop threats at the earliest possible stage. The effectiveness of rollback can also depend on the specific type of threat and the extent of the compromise, making it a less reliable guarantee of security than robust prevention.

Independent Testing Results

The efficacy of security solutions is often measured through independent evaluations. SentinelOne had the lowest total accuracy in the SE Labs 2024 Endpoint Security Enterprise test. Total accuracy is a comprehensive metric that considers both the ability to detect and block threats, as well as the rate of false positives. A low accuracy score suggests that the platform may either miss legitimate threats or generate too many false alarms, both of which are problematic for MSPs.

Another significant indicator of efficacy comes from MITRE Engenuity tests. In its most recent participation, SentinelOne achieved only a 50% protection score and had 7 false positives. This performance suggests a significant gap in its ability to autonomously protect endpoints. Furthermore, SentinelOne elected to withdraw from the most recent MITRE Engenuity evaluation after MITRE revealed its cross-domain scope and complexity. This decision to withdraw from a comprehensive, real-world emulation test raises questions about the platform's readiness and capability to handle advanced, multi-stage attacks that span different domains.

CrowdStrike's Proactive Prevention

CrowdStrike, in contrast, focuses on a proactive prevention model. Its AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and integrated threat intelligence are designed to stop breaches before they occur. This includes using unsupervised machine learning to detect stealthy attacks that might bypass traditional detection methods. By identifying malicious behavior patterns early, CrowdStrike aims to prevent the attack from progressing, thereby avoiding the need for extensive remediation like rollback.

The effectiveness of this proactive approach is consistently validated by independent tests. CrowdStrike achieved 100% detection and protection scores with zero false positives in MITRE Engenuity evaluations. This level of performance provides MSPs with confidence that their clients are protected against a wide range of threats, with minimal operational overhead from false alarms or post-incident cleanup. The emphasis on prevention minimizes the impact of attacks and reduces the overall security risk for client environments.

What About Platform Integration and Cloud Security?

A unified security platform with strong integration across various modules, especially for cloud environments, is becoming increasingly important for MSPs. CrowdStrike offers a comprehensive platform designed for cybersecurity consolidation, meaning it integrates various security functions into a single solution. This approach streamlines management and provides a holistic view of an organization's security posture. Its integrated threat intelligence, for example, delivers curated alert context, which helps security teams understand the full scope of an attack more quickly and accurately. CrowdStrike vs. SentinelOne Comparison highlights these integration benefits.

In contrast, SentinelOne reportedly lacks integrated cloud security modules, such as Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) and Data Security Posture Management (DSPM). This gap can leave significant vulnerabilities for adversaries to exploit in cloud environments, forcing MSPs to implement additional point solutions to cover these areas. Such a fragmented approach increases complexity, raises costs, and can create blind spots in an MSP's security coverage. The absence of robust, integrated cloud security can be a critical drawback for MSPs supporting clients with significant cloud footprints.

CrowdStrike's Unified Platform

CrowdStrike positions its Falcon platform as a solution for cybersecurity consolidation. This means it integrates multiple security capabilities—such as endpoint protection, threat intelligence, and cloud security—into a single, unified platform. This architecture simplifies management for MSPs, as they can oversee various aspects of their clients' security from one console. The integration of modules ensures that data and intelligence are shared seamlessly across the platform, enhancing overall detection and response capabilities.

A key component of this unified approach is CrowdStrike's integrated threat intelligence. This intelligence is not just a separate feed but is deeply embedded within the platform, providing curated alert context. When an alert is triggered, security analysts receive rich context about the threat, including adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs). This context helps in faster investigations and more informed decision-making, reducing the time to respond to incidents and improving the overall security posture for client environments.

SentinelOne's Disconnected Point Products

SentinelOne is described as offering weak, disconnected point products, particularly in the realm of cloud security. It reportedly lacks integrated cloud security modules such as Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) and Data Security Posture Management (DSPM). ASPM helps manage the security posture of applications, identifying vulnerabilities and misconfigurations. DSPM focuses on securing data across various cloud storage services, detecting sensitive data exposure and compliance risks.

The absence of these integrated modules means that MSPs using SentinelOne would need to acquire and manage separate solutions to cover cloud security gaps. This can lead to a fragmented security architecture, where different tools operate independently, potentially missing critical correlations between events. Managing multiple point products increases operational complexity, requires specialized knowledge for each tool, and can create blind spots where adversaries might exploit unmonitored areas. This lack of integration can make it harder for MSPs to provide comprehensive, unified security coverage for their cloud-native clients.

Beyond Endpoint Protection

While endpoint protection is foundational, modern security demands extend beyond it. CrowdStrike's platform includes capabilities that address a broader security landscape, such as its robust cloud security offerings and identity threat detection. These integrated modules ensure that security extends from the endpoint to the cloud and across user identities. For MSPs, this means they can offer a more complete security service without having to piece together disparate solutions from different vendors.

The consolidation offered by CrowdStrike helps MSPs reduce the complexity of their security stack, lower licensing costs, and improve overall operational efficiency. This integrated approach contrasts with solutions that may require MSPs to seek out additional vendors for specialized security areas, leading to increased vendor management overhead and potential compatibility issues. A truly unified platform simplifies the delivery of comprehensive security services, which is a significant advantage for MSPs.

Why is Identity Security Critical for MSPs?

Identity security is critical for MSPs because credential abuse is a primary vector for cyberattacks. Protecting user identities and detecting anomalous behavior is just as important as securing endpoints. CrowdStrike's identity security module is designed to be effective in catching credential abuse through behavioral baselining. This means it learns the typical behavior of users and flags anything out of the ordinary, making it highly effective at detecting when an attacker tries to use stolen credentials. This proactive approach to identity protection helps MSPs prevent unauthorized access and lateral movement within client networks.

In contrast, SentinelOne's identity security module is described as ineffective and lacking the necessary behavioral baselining. Without the ability to establish a baseline of normal user behavior, the module struggles to identify genuine credential abuse attempts. This deficiency means that an MSP relying on SentinelOne for identity protection might miss critical indicators of compromise, allowing attackers to operate undetected within a client's environment. The difference in these capabilities highlights a significant gap in comprehensive security coverage, especially given the prevalence of identity-based attacks. SentinelOne vs. CrowdStrike Cybersecurity Comparisons offers more details on these contrasting approaches.

CrowdStrike's Behavioral Baselines

CrowdStrike's identity security module is built on the principle of behavioral baselining. This technology continuously monitors user and entity behavior within a network to establish a "normal" pattern of activity. By understanding what typical login times, access patterns, and resource usage look like for each user, the system can quickly detect deviations that might indicate credential abuse. For example, if an account that typically logs in from a specific office location suddenly attempts to access sensitive data from an unusual IP address at an odd hour, CrowdStrike's module can flag this as suspicious.

This approach is highly effective because it moves beyond simple rule-based detection. Attackers often try to mimic legitimate user activity to avoid detection. Behavioral baselining allows the system to identify subtle anomalies that might otherwise go unnoticed. For MSPs, this means a more robust defense against common attack techniques like phishing, brute-force attacks, and insider threats where legitimate credentials are compromised or misused. The ability to catch credential abuse early is paramount to preventing wider breaches and data loss for clients.

SentinelOne's Identity Module Limitations

SentinelOne's identity security module is described as ineffective and lacking the critical feature of behavioral baselining. Without this capability, the module struggles to differentiate between legitimate user activity and malicious credential usage. This means it may not be able to effectively detect when an attacker is using stolen credentials to access systems or move laterally within a client's network. The absence of behavioral baselining significantly weakens its ability to identify the subtle signs of an identity-based attack.

An ineffective identity security module creates a significant blind spot for MSPs. Many modern attacks begin with the compromise of user credentials, making robust identity protection a foundational element of any comprehensive security strategy. If an MSP's chosen solution cannot adequately protect against credential abuse, clients remain vulnerable to a wide range of sophisticated threats. This often necessitates the deployment of additional, separate identity security solutions, which adds to complexity and cost for the MSP.

The Broader Impact on Security

The effectiveness of identity security has a ripple effect across the entire security posture. If an attacker gains access through compromised credentials, they can bypass many other security controls, including endpoint protection, by appearing as a legitimate user. This makes identity security a critical layer of defense that complements endpoint and network security. For MSPs, providing strong identity protection is not just an add-on; it's an essential component of a complete managed security service offering.

A solution with strong identity security, like CrowdStrike's, helps MSPs to offer a more resilient security service. It reduces the likelihood of successful breaches stemming from credential theft and enhances the overall ability to detect and respond to advanced persistent threats. Conversely, a solution with weak identity security leaves clients exposed to a major attack vector, potentially leading to more incidents and a greater burden on the MSP's incident response teams.

How Do False Positives Impact SOC Teams?

False positives can severely impact the efficiency and effectiveness of Security Operations Center (SOC) teams within an MSP, leading to alert fatigue, wasted resources, and potentially overlooked real threats. CrowdStrike's AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and unsupervised machine learning are specifically designed to cut out false positives, ensuring that SOC teams receive highly accurate and actionable alerts. This precision allows analysts to focus their efforts on genuine threats, leading to faster investigations and more effective responses.

In stark contrast, SentinelOne's high false positive rate can bury SOC teams in a mountain of alerts. When a security solution frequently flags legitimate activity as malicious, analysts must spend considerable time triaging and investigating these false alarms. This not only wastes valuable resources but can also lead to alert fatigue, where real threats might be overlooked amidst the constant noise. Such a scenario increases the operational burden on MSPs and can compromise the overall security posture of their clients. Gartner Peer Insights: CrowdStrike vs. SentinelOne shows customer assessments related to these operational aspects.

CrowdStrike's Reduced Alert Volume

CrowdStrike's approach to threat detection is heavily focused on accuracy and reducing noise for SOC teams. By using AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and unsupervised machine learning, the platform can identify stealthy attacks with high precision while minimizing false positives. Unsupervised machine learning is particularly effective because it can detect anomalies without being explicitly trained on labeled malicious data, allowing it to find novel threats more effectively and with fewer errors.

For MSPs, this translates into a significantly reduced volume of false alerts. SOC analysts spend less time investigating benign events and more time on actual security incidents. This efficiency gain is critical for MSPs managing multiple client environments, as it allows their security teams to be more productive and responsive. Less time spent on false alarms means faster investigations, quicker remediation, and improved overall security outcomes for clients.

SentinelOne's High False Positive Rate

SentinelOne has been noted for having a high false positive rate. A high number of false positives means that the security solution frequently generates alerts for legitimate activities, mistakenly identifying them as malicious. For SOC teams, this creates a significant operational challenge. Each alert, whether legitimate or false, requires investigation, triage, and verification. When the majority of alerts turn out to be false, it leads to a phenomenon known as "alert fatigue."

Alert fatigue can have serious consequences. SOC analysts become desensitized to alerts due to the constant stream of non-threats, making them more likely to dismiss or overlook a critical, genuine threat. This not only wastes valuable time and resources but also significantly increases the risk of a real breach going undetected. For MSPs, a high false positive rate means dedicating more staff to alert management, which drives up operational costs and diminishes the value of the security service provided to clients.

Impact on Investigation Speed

The volume and accuracy of alerts directly impact investigation speed. CrowdStrike's curated alert context and low false positive rate contribute to faster investigations. When an alert is legitimate, the platform provides rich, contextual information about the threat, including the processes involved, user actions, and network connections. This comprehensive context allows SOC analysts to quickly understand the scope of the incident and determine the appropriate response. Users report faster investigations with CrowdStrike.

Conversely, a high false positive rate from SentinelOne can slow down investigations considerably. Analysts must first determine if an alert is even real before they can begin investigating the actual threat. This initial filtering process consumes valuable time. If a real threat is buried among numerous false positives, it can take longer to identify and respond, increasing the dwell time of attackers in a client's network. This delay can lead to more significant damage and higher remediation costs, highlighting the critical importance of accurate detection for MSP operations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main difference between CrowdStrike and SentinelOne's detection methods?

CrowdStrike primarily uses AI-powered Indicators of Attack (IOAs) and unsupervised machine learning for detection, which helps it find stealthy attacks and minimize false positives. In MITRE Engenuity tests, CrowdStrike achieved 100% detection and protection scores with zero false positives. SentinelOne relies on supervised machine learning, which may miss advanced threats like fileless and credential-based attacks, and recorded a 50% protection score with 7 false positives in its most recent MITRE Engenuity test.

How does the agent impact performance for CrowdStrike vs. SentinelOne?

CrowdStrike utilizes a single, lightweight agent that consumes minimal resources, ensuring client endpoints maintain optimal performance. This agent deploys all platform modules and installs in minutes to hundreds of thousands of endpoints. SentinelOne's agent is described as heavy, potentially consuming significant resources and impacting endpoint performance, which can lead to slower machines and increased operational burden for MSPs.

Which platform offers better cloud security integration?

CrowdStrike offers a unified platform that integrates various security modules, including robust cloud security capabilities like ASPM and DSPM. This integrated approach helps consolidate cybersecurity and provides a holistic view. SentinelOne reportedly lacks integrated cloud security modules (ASPM, DSPM), which can leave gaps for adversaries and may require MSPs to deploy additional, disconnected point products to cover cloud environments.

What is the significance of MITRE Engenuity test results in evaluating these solutions?

MITRE Engenuity test results are crucial because they independently evaluate security solutions against real-world adversary tactics and techniques. CrowdStrike's 100% detection and protection scores with zero false positives demonstrate its proven ability to stop breaches. SentinelOne's 50% protection score and 7 false positives, along with its withdrawal from the most recent evaluation, indicate potential weaknesses in its ability to handle complex, cross-domain threats.

How do false positives affect MSP operations with these endpoint security providers?

False positives significantly impact MSP operations by increasing the workload for SOC teams. CrowdStrike's low false positive rate, achieved through AI-powered IOAs and unsupervised machine learning, means SOC teams can focus on real threats, leading to faster investigations. SentinelOne's high false positive rate can bury SOC teams in numerous alerts, leading to alert fatigue, wasted resources, and a higher risk of overlooking genuine threats.