Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Digital Guardian vs Trellix Advanced Threat Defense comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Digital Guardian
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
32nd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (24th), Endpoint Encryption (14th), Mobile Data Protection (6th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (61st)
Trellix Advanced Threat Def...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Digital Guardian is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Advanced Threat Defense is 1.9%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trellix Advanced Threat Defense1.9%
Digital Guardian1.4%
Other96.7%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

Sandeep Jopat - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Researcher at a engineering company with 10,001+ employees
Highly customizable, helpful support, and multiple modules available
Digital Guardian is generally considered stable, with its robust data loss prevention capabilities being highly valued by organizations. However, as with any complex software solution, there may be occasional challenges in terms of compatibility with certain operating systems or applications. In such cases, it may be necessary to modify settings or entries within Digital Guardian to ensure optimal performance. Overall, Digital Guardian is a stable solution that can be highly customized to meet the specific needs and requirements of organizations. As with any software solution, regular maintenance and support from a team of experts is necessary to ensure optimal performance and stability.
PP
RSSI at SDIS49
Ensuring long-term reliability while seeking internal email management enhancements
Prisma is a commercial name of the firewall now, but we don't work with the cloud product. Only our company is using it and we do not recommend it to customers. For us, it's transparent because it's a cloud product, so we don't really know the version as it's always updated. We have not had any problem, but it's difficult to report on what's going on because some days they can wash out perhaps 100 mails, and then it's difficult to say how many attacks you have reached. The right email has been washed out and then nobody has complained. We do not use the Threat Visualization feature; as we are in MX, the mail is washed out before it is in the mail inbox of the user, thus avoiding any problem requiring a reservation. In fact, there is no integration with existing security frameworks. The only problem we can have is that as we have no API interface, there is no inspection of internal mail. I rate Trellix Advanced Threat Defense a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"It has been scalable."
"There is a built-in endpoint detection response that helps save money."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"The fact that in 10 years, we have had no problem is the most valuable feature for us; it's really a washing machine, but the only problem we face is that it's difficult to report on this product."
"It is very scalable."
"Its greatest strength is the DXL client which can rapidly disseminate attack information to all clients via the McAfee Agent instead of going through the ePO server."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Provides good exfiltration, and is an all-in-one product."
"The most valuable features are the administration console and its detection and response module."
"It stops in excess of twenty-five malware events per month, all of which could be critical to the business."
"I recommend this solution because of its ease of use."
 

Cons

"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"Technical support could be better."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"I would like to see future versions of the solution incorporate artificial intelligence technology."
"There could be a tool that automatically updates all-new Microsoft IPs, which are available for free to connect to the client."
"Lacks remote capabilities not dependent on the internet."
"We'd like them to be better at dealing with script threats."
"The only problem we can have is that as we have no API interface, there is no inspection of internal mail."
"The initial setup was industry standard complex. It takes awhile and has a lot of planning involved. It could be simplified with product redesign."
"This solution needs to be made "cloud ready"."
"Make the ATD system a part of the whole product and take the whole thing onto the cloud. While it is there already, it is not to the same level as the on-premise version."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If I compare Digital Guardian with Symantec, the license cost is lower, but McAfee can be cheaper than Digital Guardian. It depends on how many licenses you plan to buy and how big the project is. The cost is not so high as Symantec, but not as cheap as McAfee. They can easily sell the solution for price."
"The cost was around $300,000."
"Digital Guardian has both, subscription and perpetual licenses, but I think when everything (all technologies) will go to the cloud they will only offer subscriptions."
"The price of Digital Guardian is expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten because Digital Guardian is expensive."
"The price of Digital Guardian is on the higher end compared to other vendors."
"Our licensing fees for this solution are approximately one million dollars per year."
"The product is expensive, but it is better than the rest of them in the industry."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
Government
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Performing Arts
11%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
I recommend this solution because of its ease of use.
What needs improvement with McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
I would like to see an API interface for internal email and control of outgoing email to make it closer to 10. It's necessary; today we have an MX interface, and it would be interesting to have an ...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
We are working with Palo Alto products, specifically firewalls. We are only using Palo Alto Firewalls and not Cortex. With FireEye and Trellix, we only work with ETP now because the NDR function wh...
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee Advanced Threat Defense
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Fifth Avenue Theatre, Jabil Circuit
The Radicati Group, Florida International University, MGM Resorts International, County Durham andDarlington NHS Foundation Trust
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital Guardian vs. Trellix Advanced Threat Defense and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.