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

Google Security Operations vs Trellix ESM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

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

Google Security Operations
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
25th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (14th), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (10th)
Trellix ESM
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
17th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of Google Security Operations is 1.2%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix ESM is 1.1%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trellix ESM1.1%
Google Security Operations1.2%
Other97.7%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2203269 - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time threat detection and alarm management have improved security operations
Google SecOps is extremely useful for threat detection and hunting. It provides a detailed pipeline for detection and is beneficial for real-time threat monitoring when integrated with Mandiant. The tool's integration capabilities are effective, and it helps in managing alarms for normal threats efficiently. Overall, Google SecOps is a very useful service for security operations.
Daniel Durian - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps to monitor and detect cyberattacks
The tool's effectiveness depends on how you define your log sources. To build visibility of incoming and outgoing traffic, you need logs from perimeter defense, firewalls, web application firewalls, and endpoint protection. With good traffic visibility, incident response time is really quick. Trellix ESM provides situation awareness. On the dashboard, I can see outbound and inbound communications to known threat hosts, IPS/IDS activity, and threat intelligence of the perimeter defense in the firewall. This information helps preempt attacks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Siemplify is the playbooks that can be created."
"Overall, Google SecOps is a very useful service for security operations."
"The playbooks feature in Siemplify is crucial for automation. We've utilized both standard and custom integrations with other security operation solutions, enhancing our flexibility. The user interface is generally straightforward, although recent changes may require some adjustment and Siemplify's integrations and capabilities offer potential support for various compliance requirements."
"Google SecOps is extremely useful for threat detection and hunting."
"Without hyperbole, I have never, in my entire career, encountered a vendor or a vendor community as awesome as Siemplify. Siemplify and the Siemplify Community quite literally made it possible for our SOC to increase almost five-fold in our number of clients and number of analysts and to go from a Monday to Friday 9-5 shop to a 24/7 shop all in the span of under a year and a half and all while continually adding capabilities and improving the services we offer to our clients."
"The most valuable feature is for the security operation center because it provides visibility of all traffic within the company infrastructure."
"The solution is 100% stable. We really have had a great time working with it. It hasn't let us down."
"It is a good central viewpoint for issues. These can then be investigated in more detail on the subnet server(s)/endpoints."
"Scalability is quite easier with Trellix ESM, because all we need to do is add more receivers to it, so it can go to any point."
"It enables us to detect malicious threats, issues, or vulnerabilities in our network."
"I like the ease of deployment."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. Over the years I have always been using this solution and have become comfortable with it."
"I rate the tool's deployment an eight out of ten. The deployment is completed in two days."
 

Cons

"The main improvement could be in the accuracy and detail provided in threat descriptions."
"Building the playbooks could be easier and the integration could improve. It is a difficult process, such as what API connections need to be made."
"I'm inclined to say that I'd love to see some Machine Learning capabilities integrated into the platform, however, I just attended a demo this morning where Siemplify gave a sneak peek into some Machine Learning capabilities that they are currently developing and have roadmapped for release soon."
"We often encounter minor issues that could be improved, but we maintain communication with the developers and submit feature requests. Recently, I requested enhancements such as improved search functionality within playbooks and expanded options for exporting case data."
"The main improvement could be in the accuracy and detail provided in threat descriptions."
"It is more difficult to operate Trellix ESM than other solutions."
"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."
"Product-wise, adding accounts on a single data source by batch would be a really great help."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"Areas of Trellix ESM that could be improved or enhanced include checking on the clients who are still on-prem, especially banks, as most are not moving everything to the cloud due to confidentiality and accessibility during network outages."
"We need to improve Trellix ESM by making sure that most of the logging devices available in the global market should be covered, and if there is any device which is not covered, there should not be any additional charges for writing the custom parsers on that."
"The disk space needed for events is not clear. In all clients, we had at least more than 100GB free that we could not use."
"Customized reports and alerting functionality could be included in the dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is good, and they are competitive compared to providers such as RSA and IBM QRadar."
"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."
"When compared to IBM Security QRadar and other similar platforms, the pricing of McAfee ESM is reasonable and comparatively less expensive."
"We pay for our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The price is good. It's moderate. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. There are different models available, and they can also be monthly. You can choose monthly or yearly. It's very flexible. If our existing customers exceed the current plan, you can just call McAfee and get it extended."
"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."
"It is an inexpensive product. We purchase its yearly license."
"The cost is dependent on the customer's environment and requirements."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Feb 26, 2015
HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. ​McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm
We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
7%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Siemplify?
The playbooks feature in Siemplify is crucial for automation. We've utilized both standard and custom integrations with other security operation solutions, enhancing our flexibility. The user inter...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Siemplify?
The pricing for Google SecOps and Microsoft Sentinel is almost the same, with no significant differences.
What needs improvement with Siemplify?
The main improvement could be in the accuracy and detail provided in threat descriptions. Google SecOps reports could be more detailed, similar to the comprehensive descriptions provided by Microso...
What do you like most about McAfee ESM?
The solution's technical support is great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee ESM?
When discussing Trellix ESM pricing and licensing, if you consider some premium product, the pricing also has to be premium, however, enterprise customers who look for a premium product, alongside ...
What needs improvement with McAfee ESM?
Areas of Trellix ESM that could be improved or enhanced include checking on the clients who are still on-prem, especially banks, as most are not moving everything to the cloud due to confidentialit...
 

Also Known As

Siemplify ThreatNexus
McAfee ESM, NitroSecurity, McAfee Enterprise Security Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

FedEx Mondelez Intenrational Check Point Trustwave Atos Cyberint Bae Systems Crowe Longwall Security Telefonica Nordea HCL
San Francisco Police Credit Union, Wªstenrot Gruppe, Volusion, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, Government of New Brunswick, State of Colorado, Macquarie Telecom, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Cologne Bonn Airport
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Security Operations vs. Trellix ESM and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.