We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions is their ability to detect and respond to spam and viruses in their early stages."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Kaspersky EDR offers automated response capabilities, enhancing efficiency by enabling quick investigation and response to potential threats on Android devices."
"One of the good features is the provider's Faulting capability. If any of our systems detect malware, we can check the behavior of the malware by sending it to Kaspersky's sandbox environment. This helps us assess how destructive the malware is. After analyzing it, we can create use cases and protection measures based on that behavior. So, this is the best feature of Kaspersky."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"Kaspersky offers more visible and comprehensive features compared to other products."
"It downloads essential security patches that are valuable for my PC."
"Technical support is excellent."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"The activation of features within ENS and the collection of threats into a single console is a strong point."
"The technical support services are good."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"Trellix integrates well with most SIEM and data classification solutions."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"I want to be able to use the product as a patch management tool for my endpoints since it is an area that is not working effectively for me."
"It needs improvement in communication between the network and endpoint, as well as between endpoint and server."
"Kaspersky EDR could be improved by adding network detection capabilities to enhance convenience and security."
"Incorporating an AI protection tool with the capability to detect and prevent zero-day threats, particularly those with a five-star rating in terms of severity would be beneficial."
"There is room for improvement in the support."
"The product does not detect zero-day threats."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive. It should improve its stability."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve by an overall simplification of the solution."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
"I would like to see simple processing and reporting online."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"It is a very heavy tool, unfortunately."
"The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."
"The product could be flexible and offer better pricing."
"One suggestion is they should reduce the constant notifications. Whenever I open my laptop, there are too many notifications from McAfee, and it gets annoying."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 16 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Provides the ability to send detected malware to Kaspersky's sandbox environment for behavioral analysis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Sangfor Endpoint Secure and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Open EDR. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.
