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

ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 vs Trellix Endpoint Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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

ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (19th), Container Security (25th), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (9th)
Trellix Endpoint Security
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
101
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Extended Detection and Response (XDR) category, the mindshare of ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security is 1.8%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Maksym Toporkov - PeerSpot reviewer
A competitive choice for network detection and response with exceptional user interface, ease of implementation and minimal false positives
The NDR feature analyzes network traffic, creating records with connection details. While these records offer insights, there's a limitation in investigating payloads directly. ExtraHop provides an option for an additional server to save payloads, but its temporary storage has constraints. Unlike some competitors, it lacks an automatic payload-saving feature for each detection, presenting an improvement opportunity. Suggested enhancement involves the main sensor prompting payload storage for specific detections, streamlining the investigation process, and contributing to a more efficient workflow. A drawback includes packet storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations.
Abdullah Al Hadi - PeerSpot reviewer
Customization capabilities allow clients to autonomously deploy policies
There are a few areas where Trellix Endpoint Security ( /categories/endpoint-protection-platform-epp ) can improve. Firstly, the high CPU utilization when agents are installed can negatively impact client systems. Another issue is with end-users outside the network, where the agent handler sometimes fails to deploy the product properly. Improvements are needed in forensic analytics to detect specific vulnerabilities. It would also help if detection specifics were identified more quickly and the problem-solving process accelerated, especially to meet larger clients' expectations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is scalable."
"It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for network security and management."
"It is very easy to collect and handle data in ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud. Integration with Big Data is also easy. Many of our customers integrate it with Big Data platforms like Splunk or Elastic. It is also easy to handle and easy to understand."
"The product helps us by contacting us if there are any virus attacks on our system."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"This product has the capability to check a wide range of vulnerabilities and devices."
"The initial setup is straightforward, not complex."
"Automatic user recovery prior to Windows booting up."
"I have found many of the features to be useful."
"One valuable feature is Threat Prevention with the on-demand scan."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
 

Cons

"A drawback includes bucket storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations."
"They can include integration with SAP. Currently, no vendor provides network performance monitoring in the SAP market. It is a very big market. We have around 400 customers for SAP in Korea. In the USA, there are more than 10,000 customers."
"There needs to be more support."
"Signatures to protect against new attacks."
"The solution should provide a more easy way to uninstall it on specific stations."
"The interface is complex."
"It would be a lot easier if I could add multiple user accounts within a single device."
"The product does not seem to be cloud-native and there are issues with automating it. Automation is not intuitive."
"It would be nice if the solution was a bit more stable."
"The initial setup isn't so easy. You need to know what you are doing."
"Sometimes, while installing the ePO, we were getting so many errors and I don't know why it happened."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared to other solutions, it aligns with the market average, indicating a competitive pricing level."
"The license costs are very reasonable, around 1,000 to 1,200 rupees per year."
"The price of the solution is in the middle range compare to others and could be reduced. There are not any additional costs."
"Its price is very high. It is higher than its competitors, and it should be less."
"The price of McAfee is pretty similar to Symantec, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The tool is affordable"
"Annual license fee is good"
"The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"Its price is reasonable, but it could be made free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Educational Organization
42%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360?
It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for...
What needs improvement with ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360?
The NDR feature analyzes network traffic, creating records with connection details. While these records offer insights, there's a limitation in investigating payloads directly. ExtraHop provides an...
What advice do you have for others considering ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360?
I recommend prioritizing demos over POCs when engaging with vendors. Organizing POCs involves significant time and resource investments for both parties. Instead, invest time in multiple demo sessi...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy various components as desired with McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas many othe...
What do you like most about McAfee Endpoint Security?
It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
Trellix Endpoint Security is cost-effective and provides excellent value for money, with no need for extra expenses for premium support.
 

Also Known As

ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud, Reveal(X) Cloud
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Wizards of the Coast
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 vs. Trellix Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.