We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Forescout Platform based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Trellix Endpoint Security users like the ePolicy Orchestrator, the solution’s robust central management console. Forescout Platform stands out for its agentless visibility and advanced features like device fingerprinting. Trellix could improve by reducing resource usage, enhancing stability, and making the solution more user-friendly. Users say Forescout could be better at resolving connectivity and license issues. Users want better device compatibility and troubleshooting tools.
Service and Support: Some users say Trellix support is helpful and responsive, while others believe there is room for improvement in communication and resolution times. Some users reported positive experiences with Forescout support, but others requested better responsiveness and training.
Ease of Deployment: Setting up Trellix Endpoint Security is simple if the user has some expertise. Some users found Forescout’s setup to be simple and adaptable, while others perceived it as more complex and time-intensive.
Pricing: Trellix Endpoint Security’s pricing is considered flexible, competitive, and about average compared to other solutions. The total cost of Forescout Platform can be high depending on the level of customization and integration required.
ROI: Users reported saving time by implementing Trellix Endpoint Security. Forescout Platform yields a solid ROI by improving network access control and overall security.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Trellix Endpoint Security over Forescout Platform based on user feedback. Users like Trellix's comprehensive management abilities and single-pane-of-glass administration. It is praised for its reliability and low false positive rate. Forescout Platform receives mixed reviews for its complex setup process and customer service. It is also considered expensive.
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"The visibility into threats is also very impressive because Microsoft helps you predict things and provides analytics to help you really improve your security. And all of this technology works across the domain, so it is pretty helpful in terms of threat analytics."
"The integration between all the Defender products is the most valuable feature."
"The comprehensiveness of Microsoft's threat detection is good."
"The EDR features are valuable. By getting the EDR features, we have more control over the device. We have information about events in real-time and more protection against zero-day threats and zero-day vulnerabilities. We can monitor every event or action that a device is going through. We can get an idea if it is something malicious or if we have to take any actions."
"The summarization of emails is a valuable feature."
"The product integrates security into one tool instead of having third-party security tools."
"For me, the advanced hunting capabilities have been really great. It allowed querying the dataset with their own language, which is KQL or Kusto Query Language. That has allowed me to get much more insight into the events that have occurred. The whole power of 365 Defender is that you can get the whole story. It allows you to query an email-based activity and then correlate it with an endpoint-based activity."
"The most valuable feature of the Forescout Platform is the large capacity it can handle. Additionally, the interface of the platform is good."
"The 802.1X compliance authentication feature of this solution is very good."
"The most valuable features of the Forescout Platform are NAC for sharing, Network Access Control, and port sharing of the devices."
"The most valuable feature of the Forescout Platform it's highly customizable and flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Forescout Platform is that it has everything that Aruba has at significantly less cost."
"The solution's implementation and operation are very easy."
"The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex or difficult to set up."
"Forescout Platform has made it possible to block people working near our construction sites who should not have access to our network."
"The initial setup of Trellix Endpoint Security was straightforward."
"The most valuable features of the solution include DLP (data loss prevention), CASB (cloud access security broker) functionality, endpoint encryption, and cloud workload security."
"It's easy to use and it's very powerful. It offers nice endpoint protection."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."
"I think the costing is fine compared to other products. Cost-wise you definitely get value for your money."
"We receive good protection with this solution."
"Initially, the DLP was very valuable for disabling access to USB drives."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"This solution could be improved if it included features such as those offered by Malwarebytes."
"Automated playbooks and automated dashboards would be preferable to the way the data is currently being presented."
"It would be highly beneficial if CoPilot could identify anomalies within the network and notify the IT team."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"The cost can be high if you want to build custom license packages. Another area for improvement is the policies. In Azure, we need to implement policies in JSON format, but in 365 Defender 365, it would be helpful to use a different format so we can customize the platform."
"Stability could be improved by avoiding frequent changes to the interface."
"While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience."
"There are a few technical issues with Defender XDR that can be improved. Sometimes, the endpoint devices are not reporting properly to the Defender 365 portal. When you're getting all the information from the Microsoft portal, the devices are sometimes not in sync. We have hundreds of endpoint devices, some needing to be onboarded again."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"Other solutions have TACACS+, but Forescout does not. In the next release, I would like to see Forescout have accounting."
"It does not support the TACACS+ protocol."
"When adding what is in scope to a policy, it would be nice if you could select multiple policies instead of one policy at a time to add what is in the scope for network segmentation. I have found that during the install and configuration of the policies that if you want to modify multiple policies or enable multiple policies that you need to define what is in the scope (IP range or segments) one rule at a time. This caused some slow downs when implementing policies."
"They need to handle their Tier 1 cases differently. The biggest negative regarding Forescout is their support. Not having the ability to get instantly transferred to a support engineer for Tier 1 cases is pretty ridiculous."
"The biggest disadvantage is the pricing."
"The licensing costs are quite high. With the amount of hardware we have, we need too many licenses to make the product effective and it's ultimately just too costly."
"The system controls could be better."
"The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming."
"Technical support is an area that can be improved because sometimes, the response time is a bit slow and the explanation is short."
"They can improve its resource consumption, such as memory, and maybe provide better or smaller updates. It always takes a lot of resources, but it has been getting better. I have been using McAfee products for the last 20 years or so, and I know it is getting better."
"We don't like the solution since it requires much memory consumption and consumes much CPU resources."
"The endpoint has room for improvement because it's restrictive, it's very sensitive. Sometimes it can delete something that you need and so sometimes you have to disable the antivirus."
"They can make it free, but that's not going to happen."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"The solution could provide open XDR in addition to EDR."
Forescout Platform is ranked 14th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 69 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 94 reviews. Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC and Nozomi Networks, 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 Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Forescout Platform vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
