We performed a comparison between CylanceOPTICS and Trellix Active Response 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 console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The initial setup was fairly straightforward. To get a large health care organization sorted, we had to create exemptions because some of the scripts and some of the automations were broken."
"It's pretty unintrusive"
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. I would give it a close ten as possible because, like SentinelOne, I've seen incompatibility. Whereas Cylance, I've seen none."
"It automatically blocks the threats, helping us investigate if they harm the environment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to respond to zero-day and unknown threats."
"It is a bit early in our evaluation process to give proper feedback, although so far, the overall feedback is good."
"Cylance is not a signature-based protection solution and instead works proactively using AI and ML models to patrol for malicious behavior."
"CylanceOPTICS is pretty stable."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"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've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"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."
"The technical support could be improved although it's probably better than you get with a lot of the other traditional antivirus solutions"
"One minor issue that somebody mentioned was that they didn't like their management console."
"The product's initial setup process could be easy."
"The reporting is very weak and not very good at all."
"CylanceOPTICS could benefit from more granular control in the timeline-building process. Ideally, users would be able to drill deeper into the analysis rather than have the machine dictate the direction."
"The detection component is something that they have to work on."
"The product's technical support is slow."
"The tools are ineffective. It flags a lot of things. To give you an example, it detected Google Chrome and blocked the user's access to it. That it mistook for malicious, which turned out to be a false positive."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
Earn 20 points
CylanceOPTICS is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 10 reviews while Trellix Active Response is ranked 57th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). CylanceOPTICS is rated 7.6, while Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4. The top reviewer of CylanceOPTICS writes "Enables the isolation and inoculation of infected machines, offering a practical solution for dealing with threats and preventing their spread within the environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". CylanceOPTICS is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS). See our CylanceOPTICS vs. Trellix Active Response 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.