We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"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"
"It is a good anti-malware product that is highly stable."
"The most valuable features are the solution's thorough detection and ease of use."
"We have had no issues with the support and consider it to be good, even when it comes to accredited resellers."
"The solution's deployment is very easy and flexible."
"Useful for the day-to-day analysis of the security infrastructure."
"I haven't had a problem with its stability yet. Since we deployed it, we haven't had one computer instance where we had to reimage the computer due to the virus."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra has many features, such as VPN, web filtering, and email filtering. The product has many good reviews, and I like how straightforward it is to implement. It's also easy to access and use."
"The cloud management is easy and useful, especially in our case when we have multiple offices in different locations."
"The independent modules are very good."
"The stability has been great."
"The performance is good."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Detections could be improved."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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 support needs improvement."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"They should include the Hebrew language for its technical support in terms of communication."
"I would like to see the capability for remote installation added, in particular for servers."
"The firewall security could be better."
"Bitfender could improve their modules on the server. For example, Bitdefender doesn't have content filters or firewall modules on the server. It would be great if it had a networking module and a content filter module at the workstations."
"There's room for improvement in terms of protection. That's my primary concern."
"If we could directly push the agent to the script, it'll be very good."
"The software itself is solid. It would be better if it was more of a real-time solution, like SentinelOne. The one thing that holds me back on the SentinelOne side is that I can blacklist websites and stuff like that, but it's not as granular as Bitdefender. With Bitdefender, I feel like I have more control over what I can whitelist and blacklist."
"There was a bit of a problem deploying."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"So far, McAfee MVISION Endpoint ticks off all of our boxes, but its pricing could always be better."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"I would like to see more automation."
"You do not have access to all the features when you use the Trellix web interface. For example, you cannot do device or drive encryption from the web interface. Also, when we're working with customers, it's sometimes challenging to get sales support. Delays mean we might lose an opportunity. Lastly, Trellix lacks some documentation about custom features."
"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."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"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."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is ranked 15th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 54 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is rated 8.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone EDR writes "High-quality threat intelligence, including encryption and mobile device protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Intercept X Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, 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 EDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.