We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This is stable and scalable."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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."
"Virus scan and the ability to remotely install are valuable features. Being able to manage everything in one place and set different policies and rules for different computer types are very useful features. It also has ransomware protection. It is very simple to use, and it is very effective."
"The domain integrator functionality is particularly noteworthy, allowing me to leverage my existing network infrastructure."
"The product provides a single dashboard."
"The product is a good standard security tool."
"I like its unified interface, which also helps you scan Outlook email, for example. Multiple products can be standardized across endpoints or the EDR solution, and the integrations with SIEMs."
"The product offers an opportunity to monitor the things happening in our network. It also has a comprehensive dashboard."
"When it comes to the web, according to our customers, this product stands out due to its superior performance compared to others."
"It is very easy to configure and deploy."
"The performance is good."
"It's a stable solution with good performance."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"Trellix Endpoint Security has a full suite of DLP."
"The extendability is great."
"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."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Detections could be improved."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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"
"The connection with the controller needs improvement. Some connections are currently unstable."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security could improve the RDP, I have problems sometimes."
"Overall, Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is quite good. It always has new features which customers can use for free, so I can't say that something is missing in the solution, though one area for improvement is that the cloud version of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security still can't connect to a central SIEM. The on-premises version has that capability, but the cloud version doesn't."
"The live monitoring service from Bitdefender's center is expensive and has room for improvement."
"The lack of detecting security threats and high memory usage need to be improved."
"My main concern is that it's a bit heavy for some devices. Like Kaspersky or McAfee, it uses more RAM or memory. Similar to that, it causes issues for users and their own resources, similar to that. If you deploy on old legacy devices with only 1GB of RAM, then it could be a problem."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"There are compatibility concerns as Bitdefender does not support Windows 7."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"The solution lacks device control."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"Malware detection can be better. It doesn't have support and detection for the recent malware, but it has a compensatory control where it can do the behavior-based assessment and alert you when there is something malicious or unexpected. For example, when a certain user is executing the privilege command, which is not normal. These dynamic detections are good, and they compensate for malware detection."
"Looking at the current ePolicy orchestrator, and the transition of most vendors to the cloud, they need to do an improvement with the current dashboard or the overall aesthetic of their GUI."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 24th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 48 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, HP Wolf Security, Seqrite Endpoint Security and Fortinet FortiClient, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Open EDR. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
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.