Yes. AV-Comparatives EPR 2025 published total cost of ownership of $210 per agent for GravityZone versus $1,245 for Falcon — 5.9× lower per-agent cost over a 5-year contract on a 5,000-agent baseline. The cost includes list price, breach-cost contribution per scenario (using IBM's $4.4M-per-breach 2025 average), operational accuracy penalty, and workflow delay penalty. GravityZone's 100% Phase 1 Active Response means no breach-cost contribution; Falcon's 92% leaves four scenarios for Phase 2 cleanup.

Yes — with comparable depth. Through a single agent, GravityZone protects Windows, Linux, macOS, iOS, Android, and Chromebook environments. Process Protection (Advanced Threat Control plus Process Introspection) operates across Windows, macOS (full version), and Linux (report-only mode). The same prevention-first architecture applies on each platform — PHASR behavioral profiles, Network Attack Defense at the agent level, and HyperDetect pre-execution machine learning all extend beyond Windows.

Yes. GravityZone supports cloud-delivered, hybrid, and on-premises deployment, including fully air-gapped environments — confirmed in Gartner Magic Quadrant 2025 commentary. This matters for defense contractors, classified networks, regulated healthcare with strict data-residency requirements, and certain manufacturing and critical-infrastructure use cases. Falcon's cloud-only architecture cannot serve these environments.

GravityZone prioritizes prevention before detection. In 2025 AV-Comparatives Advanced Threat Protection testing, GravityZone prevented 87% of attacks at the pre-execution stage; Falcon prevented 47%. Across six AV-Comparatives Business Security Tests (2023-2025), GravityZone generated 13× fewer false alarms than Falcon — 11 vs 144. The architectural choice means GravityZone's detection layer handles a smaller, more distinguishable signal with less analyst overhead — and in MITRE ATT&CK® Evaluations for Managed Services 2024, that translated into 82 emails and alerts versus 579 from Falcon, with both achieving 93% actionable coverage.

Both protect Microsoft 365 environments. The architectural difference still applies: GravityZone prevented 87% of attacks at pre-execution in 2025 AV-Comparatives ATP testing; Falcon prevented 47%. GravityZone's Microsoft 365 sensor integrates Office 365 telemetry into the same correlation engine that handles endpoint, identity, and network events — so an attacker pivoting from a phishing email through credential theft to lateral movement surfaces as a single incident, not three disconnected alerts.

GravityZone's ransomware mitigation is independent of Windows Volume Shadow Copy — most modern ransomware strains explicitly delete shadow copies as part of standard playbooks, defeating recovery solutions that rely on them. GravityZone uses real-time tamper-proof backup of files under encryption attempt, with security teams able to restore data effortlessly through the GravityZone console. AV-Comparatives EDR Detection Validation Test 2026 awarded GravityZone certification across all 14 attack steps in APT-style intrusion testing.

Yes. GravityZone Content Control filters web access by URL, domain, and category — included in the standard endpoint license. The same agent that handles endpoint protection also enforces web access policies, covering both security (blocking known-malicious URLs, phishing pages, anonymous proxies, and command-and-control domains) and acceptable-use enforcement (categories such as social media, streaming, gambling, or adult content). HTTPS scanning and SSL certificate validation are built in, and policies follow the user across networks because the enforcement runs on the endpoint, not at a perimeter. CrowdStrike Falcon does not include category-based web content filtering as a built-in capability; web access control on a Falcon-protected fleet typically requires a separate secure web gateway (Zscaler, Netskope, or similar) and a second agent on each endpoint.