We performed a comparison between Symantec Endpoint Security and Trend Micro Deep Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Trend Micro Deep Security is the winner in this comparison. Many Symantec Endpoint Security users report being unhappy with the product’s support and AI capabilities. In contrast, Trend Micro Deep Security receives high marks for its automated features and for its support.
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The stability is very good."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"With a single console, you get control over Mac, Windows, iOS, and Android. This control is most valuable."
"I have found the central control console the most valuable feature."
"When they started they found it very easy; not easy to implement but easy to use. We started with the headquarters here and later we also implemented it for all the subsidiaries in the region, in other countries. They have a centralized solution, so they can help other countries in management."
"I like the intrusion prevention and Sonar features."
"The IPS function (with no firewall needed to be installed in the SEP client) is quite good."
"The most useful features are the antivirus, anti-spyware, and the firewall feature. It also provides application control and Host Integrity, which is a very unique feature."
"It's good for large organizations. It's able to handle a lot of users."
"Easy to use solution."
"We like the Smart protection and the Virtual patching."
"It's scalable."
"The performance is good."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It is stable and we have not faced any challenges during the rolled out"
"The most valuable feature is the virtual patching."
"It has improved functions by bringing us complete security on our clients' virtual environment."
"Aside from the basic antivirus features, there are additional features such as vulnerability protection, firewall, etc. which are helpful."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"Detections could be improved."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The support needs improvement."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"It should support the next-generation IPS. Currently, it supports only IPS."
"This latest version has proven unreliable for management and installation."
"It can maybe send notifications when there is an update and everything is successful."
"The detection and response can always be improved."
"The stability was not the best. There were times when antivirus updates broke it. It wasn't necessarily self-updating - at least, not in terms of the virus signatures. It updated in terms of the executable files. Therefore, when Windows updates would come out, they often couldn't be installed, or the computer would hang due to the fact that the updates weren't compatible with the antivirus."
"Overall, the price could be reduced."
"Since the acquisition by Broadcom, we are no longer receiving the proper support."
"Multi-domain policy options for exceptions and global blocks."
"It needs to improve its integration with a lot of other products. This should be in the road map because we have a lot of SaaS-based appliances which are not connected with each other."
"The client can show as offline sometimes, and that becomes a bit difficult for troubleshooting. We end up basically redeploying the client. This is something that could be improved in the future."
"Deep Security's most valuable features are antivirus and host intrusion detection."
"Their support should be improved. We need support in the UAE, but it is always going to some other country or region, and the time schedule is not suitable for us."
"There should be signature-based advanced and responsive features."
"The workloads must be better."
"The default reports provided don't provide much insight."
"The email relays and proxies could be improved."
Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "Offers excellent endpoint protection and great stability ". Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Micro Apex One, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.