We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and NetWitness XDR 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. NetWitness XDR is commended for its prompt threat response, seamless integration capabilities, and user behavior analytics. Trellix could improve by reducing resource usage, enhancing stability, and making the solution more user-friendly. Users say NetWitness XDR could improve its threat intelligence and investigation. Some suggested updates to its reporting engine.
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. NetWitness XDR provides effective 24/7 technical support. While some were satisfied with the response times, others experienced delays of up to 48 hours.
Ease of Deployment: Setting up Trellix Endpoint Security is simple if the user has some expertise. Some users found the initial setup of NetWitness uncomplicated, but others faced challenges.
Pricing: Trellix Endpoint Security’s pricing is considered flexible, competitive, and about average compared to other solutions. The total cost of NetWitness XDR depends on the environment and the number of endpoints. Larger users can receive discounts, but users say the solution might be too pricey for smaller companies. NetWitness XDR provides various licenses, including some that feature premium support.
ROI: Users reported saving time by implementing Trellix Endpoint Security. NetWitness XDR has demonstrated positive outcomes by improving threat detection capabilities and facilitating digital forensics.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Trellix Endpoint Security over NetWitness XDR. Users praised Trellix's extensive management capabilities, low resource usage, and reasonable price. NetWitness XDR receives mixed reviews for its slower performance, and complex licensing. Users also that NetWitness could improve its threat intelligence and user interface. Trellix Endpoint Security earned positive feedback for its customer service and support, while some NetWitness users were unsatisfied with response times.
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"The summarization of emails is a valuable feature."
"The ability to hunt that IM data set or the identity data set at the same time is valuable. As incident response professionals, we are very used to EDRs and having device process registry telemetry, but a lot of times, we do not have that identity data right there with us, so we have to go search for it in some other silo. Being able to cross-correlate via both datasets at the same time is something that we can only do in Def"
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"I like 365 Defender's advanced threat hunting. The dashboard is user-friendly with templates for site policies, etc. The most important use case is evaluating the risk links and applications."
"Microsoft 365 Defender's most valuable feature is the ability to control the shadow IP."
"It has great stability."
"The common and advanced security policies for threat hunting and blocking attacks are valuable."
"They have recently updated the features and the most valuable ones are the instant threat response, ease of use, web interface, integration, and easy access. RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very compatible with other solutions and technologies. However, they do not rely on third-party solutions and have most features built-in."
"The most valuable feature is the way it captures the traffic, and it contains every detail of the communication."
"The interface of this solution is very flexible and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Network is the single unified dashboard from which you can manage all the different products of RSA. Additionally, the integration with native applications is good."
"Technical support is knowledgeable."
"It is very easy to use, and its usability is great. The use cases are also very easy. The visualizations of the use cases are magnificent. You cannot find this in any other solution. From my point of view, it is great."
"We've contacted technical support several times. They've been very good. They have been able to help us resolve our issues."
"NetWitness Endpoint's most valuable features are its interoperability across many different operating systems and the ease of pivoting from network to endpoint via a single console."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"Communication with all Mcafee products (also 3rd parties) by DXL infrastructure."
"The solution includes a good combination of features for both signature and signature-less."
"The most valuable features are the prevention layer that detects the signature value and prevents threats in the network."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"This is a good solution for antivirus and malware protection."
"The solution is stable."
"The product is fairly reliable."
"The interface could be improved. For example, if you want to do a phishing simulation for your employees, it can take a while to figure out what to do. The interface is a bit messy and could be updated. It isn't too bad, but doing some things can be a long process."
"There are other SIEM solutions that are easier to use, mainly based on the creation of rules, use cases, and groups."
"The message trace feature for investigating mail flow issues should add more detailed information to the summary report... if they could extend the summary report a little bit, make it more descriptive, ordinary administrators could understand what happened and that the emails failed at this or that point. That way they would know the location to go to try to correct it and to prevent it from occurring again."
"365 Defender has multiple subsets, including Defender for Cloud Apps. When integrating Defender for Cloud Apps with apps on third-party cloud platforms like AWS or GCP, there are limitations on our ability to control user activities. If Microsoft added more control over third-party products, that would be a game-changer and help us quite a lot."
"Generally, antivirus products provide a central control to manage every device in terms of who is installing it or who is trying to disable it, but Microsoft doesn't have such a control center for the antivirus product it provides."
"At times, there may be delays in the execution of certain actions and their effects."
"When we do investigations, it would be better if Microsoft could populate the host dashboard more. When we open any host for investigation, we want the entire timeline of what is happening on the host, including all the users logging in, their hardware, Windows version, etc."
"There is no common area where we can manage all the policies for the EDR, third-party solutions, devices, servers, Windows, Mac, etc., but it's on the road map, and we ware waiting for that feature."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"We would like to see the hunting and investigation features of this solution improved, in order to provide better visibility of issues."
"The initial setup requires a high level of skill."
"Threat detection could be better."
"I would like to see Security Orchestration and Response Automation (SOAR) integration."
"The integration of the solution needs to be improved. The dashboard needs lots of updates as well. In the next release, we would like to see advanced fraud detection features."
"The solution lacks a reporting engine."
"NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"The software download features could stand improvement."
"The solution's technical support should be improved since we faced a lot of issues with the support. There were some delays in responses from the technical support."
"There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging."
"The tool could provide more advanced protection."
"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."
"We would like to see all the features available on cloud."
"The resolution time should be faster."
NetWitness XDR is ranked 40th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 15 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. NetWitness XDR is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of NetWitness XDR writes "Beneficial single unified dashboard, good native application integration, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". NetWitness XDR is most compared with Darktrace, ExtraHop Reveal(x), CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, 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 NetWitness XDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.
