We performed a comparison between Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"It gives all the information in a clear response."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"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."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"If the network has seen something, we can use that to put a block to all the endpoints."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"The independent modules are very good."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"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."
"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."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"The solution can be expensive."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"The integration and display of the dashboards have to be done better."
"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."
"I would like to see more automation."
"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."
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 42nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 47 reviews. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". 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". Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Darktrace 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 Open EDR. See our Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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.
