We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks 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."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"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 investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The independent modules are very good."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"Trellix integrates well with most SIEM and data classification solutions."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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"
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"The licensing model is complex to understand. It requires expertise to explain how the licensing works. You need expertise to guide you through the subscription plan."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"Limited remote connection."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"The product could be flexible and offer better pricing."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"So far, McAfee MVISION Endpoint ticks off all of our boxes, but its pricing could always be better."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing. The price should be improved, it's high."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 48 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "It provides a whole new level of visibility and integrates with most other vendors". 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". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, 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 Fortinet FortiClient. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.