No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ESET Inspect vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
53rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Detection ...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is 0.9%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.7%
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)0.9%
ESET Inspect1.0%
Other94.4%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
Duncan  Kims - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Advanced detection has reduced targeted attacks and builds daily confidence in our defenses
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a very low false positive rate compared to other products, thus increasing the SOC efficiency in how my team relies on the solution day-to-day.With the best features Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers, ease of SOAR integration helps to automate the IOC distribution, and our security team and management trust the product. Advanced detection capabilities ensure that targeted attacks will be detected and blocked before they arrive at our network. SOAR integration has assisted our security team and management in trusting the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"The level of security I get for my endpoints and servers is extremely valuable."
"My advice for others looking into using Cortex is that it is very easy to use and very useful for the customer environment, whether it's a public or private one."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"Its ability to react to cyber data attacks is awesome."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has positively impacted my organization with threat exchange and intel, low false positive ratios, and very high uptime values for both inline and spam modes, along with advanced detection and mitigation capabilities ensuring the highest level of protection and proper detection for command and control and bot attacks."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is valuable because we have a Wide Area Network with many sites, and the EDR is cross-site since it is installed and managed from the cloud."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"The investigation and rule detection feature of the solution has proven most useful for our company"
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"My advice for others considering Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is to use it, or any other Trellix products, as I believe they are excellent."
 

Cons

"There's an overall lack of features."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"A potential area of improvement for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the cost."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"I have faced some issues with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks; there is room for improvement in the sense that certain options prevent us from seeing and segregating data."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"The platform's price could be better."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The solution lacks the ability to integrate with external platforms. In future releases of the solution, I would like to see the solution increase its integration capabilities with external platforms."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"When it comes to some unknown fileless attacks, the tool is not able to detect them properly, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"I remember doing many tickets for Trellix support, and my EDR was not properly functioning. I didn't feel the detection or the real protection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I feel it is fairly priced."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"I am using the Community edition."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is not that expensive, but it's not something that a startup could buy. Pricing for it is for midsized businesses. There's an additional payment if you want data retention for more than thirty days. They gave us data retention for thirty days. Then if you want longer data retention, they have the paid option for a three-month data retention period and for a one-year data retention period."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"The price is reasonable."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The licensing costs attached to the solution are very easy to manage. There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs."
"The pricing is always high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
My experience with pricing, implementation costs and platform licensing has been positive. The solution offers a robu...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
Although Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers those detection, investigation and response capabilitie...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
The main use case for Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) in my organization is for continuous monitoring o...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Sutherland Global Services
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.