We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Trellix Endpoint Security 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."We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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"
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"Its setup is simple if you have a Windows device; it is executable."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy."
"It secures different entry points into the network."
"I rate the tool a ten out of ten when it comes to the ease of use or management part."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"On the management side, we liked the way it displays things."
"I feel McAfee Endpoint Security to be a good, mature product."
"The performance is good."
"This product has the capability to check a wide range of vulnerabilities and devices."
"Technical support is always available and very helpful."
"The solution is stable."
"The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use."
"The initial setup of Trellix Endpoint Security was straightforward."
"The reporting capabilities are a valuable feature. In enables more visibility on our network."
"Detections could be improved."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The support needs improvement."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"It is hard to manage."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"It needs real analysis of quarantined files. The EDR product isn't showing much right now."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT."
"They can make it free, but that's not going to happen."
"The solution consumes a lot of end user memory and CPU. Trellix doesn't really focus much on the anti-malware side."
"We would like to see all the features available on cloud."
"There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging."
"The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly. There are multiple solutions and there is no clear line differentiating all of them. There is a centralized console where we manage everything but most of the administrators feel a little confused when it comes to managing multiple products from a single place."
"The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming."
"When it runs in the background of the endpoint, the devices get slowed down for some applications."
"I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 27th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 39 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Trellix Endpoint Security 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.