Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Trellix ESM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (24th)
Trellix ESM
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is designed for Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and holds a mindshare of 0.9%, down 1.1% compared to last year.
Trellix ESM, on the other hand, focuses on Security Information and Event Management (SIEM), holds 1.0% mindshare, up 0.7% since last year.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

AtulChaurasia - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with intuitive features for detecting malicious files
The initial setup process is straightforward. We have to install the agent, create a package, and deploy it on servers. It has a prebuilt console managed by the cloud team of Cybereason. We don't have to worry about the console and concentrate on endpoint implementation. It takes ten days to deploy it on 10,000 devices.
Daniel Durian - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to monitor and detect cyberattacks
The tool's effectiveness depends on how you define your log sources. To build visibility of incoming and outgoing traffic, you need logs from perimeter defense, firewalls, web application firewalls, and endpoint protection. With good traffic visibility, incident response time is really quick. Trellix ESM provides situation awareness. On the dashboard, I can see outbound and inbound communications to known threat hosts, IPS/IDS activity, and threat intelligence of the perimeter defense in the firewall. This information helps preempt attacks.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."
"It is a good central viewpoint for issues. These can then be investigated in more detail on the subnet server(s)/endpoints."
"McAfee as a whole is a good solution."
"It is user-friendly. The notification part of McAfee ESM is very easy."
"It has good technical support, which is available around the clock. You can call up anytime and get whatever you want. My queues are resolved."
"Scalability is quite easier with Trellix ESM, because all we need to do is add more receivers to it, so it can go to any point."
"The solution's technical support is great."
"We are now able to completely monitor our environment so we can review what is there, which is a big win for us."
 

Cons

"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"I would like to see improvements to the user interface."
"I would like to see good analytics in future releases."
"It is more difficult to operate Trellix ESM than other solutions."
"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."
"It cannot integrate with our Next-Generation Firewall and few applications such as Cisco ACI."
"The disk space needed for events is not clear. In all clients, we had at least more than 100GB free that we could not use."
"McAfee is no more providing security updates on this product, and the enhancements to this product seem to have stopped. Moreover, we don't get proper support, and we struggle to get its support. It would be good if they can add some AI engine and out of the box use cases because it is currently limited to the same scenario and the same setup. I have done a POC for Securonix, LogRhythm. These products are much more ahead as compared to McAfee ESM. They have included multiple modules in the same solution. Correlation is very easy. If McAfee ESM can improve, especially in such implementations, then I believe it would be much better."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"The pricing is manageable."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"The pricing is fair."
"The cost is dependent on the customer's environment and requirements."
"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."
"The price is good. It's moderate. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. There are different models available, and they can also be monthly. You can choose monthly or yearly. It's very flexible. If our existing customers exceed the current plan, you can just call McAfee and get it extended."
"You should buy the distributed option instead of the all-in-one for environments with more than 1000 end points."
"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."
"We renew our license annually."
"The pricing is good, and they are competitive compared to providers such as RSA and IBM QRadar."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Feb 26, 2015
HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. ​McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm
We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Educational Organization
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
We use it to improve detection in the whole industrial sector. We are a big energy company. Across multiple endpoints, we deploy the EDR to secure all, improve detection, and also attempt to automa...
What do you like most about McAfee ESM?
The solution's technical support is great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee ESM?
When discussing Trellix ESM pricing and licensing, if you consider some premium product, the pricing also has to be premium, however, enterprise customers who look for a premium product, alongside ...
What needs improvement with McAfee ESM?
We need to improve Trellix ESM by making sure that most of the logging devices available in the global market should be covered, and if there is any device which is not covered, there should not be...
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
McAfee ESM, NitroSecurity, McAfee Enterprise Security Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
San Francisco Police Credit Union, Wªstenrot Gruppe, Volusion, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, Government of New Brunswick, State of Colorado, Macquarie Telecom, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Cologne Bonn Airport
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: January 2025.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.