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

Panda Adaptive Defense 360 vs Trellix Endpoint Security Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 9, 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

Panda Adaptive Defense 360
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
38th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
29th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Security P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
9th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
158
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is 1.7%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is 3.9%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

PaolaLamura - PeerSpot reviewer
While being easy to manage and create reports, the tool also offers a good UI
I rate the ease of use and management of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 an eight on a scale of one to ten. The tool's ability to provide information about the vulnerability is the most impactful feature of the product that has an impact on our company's security posture. Speaking about scenarios where the solution effectively prevented the security breach, I would say that our company sees how the tool blocks when our customers accidentally click on some malware, after which it quarantines that file. My company makes a playbook with the SOAR tool that Panda Adaptive Defense 360 uses to block and isolate attacks. In our company's system, if there is a big event that occurs, then to block the endpoint, we use SOAR with Panda Adaptive Defense 360 to block and isolate attacks or threats. The solution's real-time monitoring has improved our company's ability to detect threats if we use it in our company with Panda SIEMFeeder. Only if in my company there is a need to do some research, prepare a report, or if we want to change the policy, so it is not very often that we use the visualization part of the tool in our company. The reporting and analytics part of the tool has helped with the decision-making in our company since we combine different kinds of logs and situations from different ingestion logs, and we can configure a specific alert. In my company, we use the tool's data search functionality if required to check the information we need. Presently, our company uses the configuration alert and SIEMFeeder in our system. I rate the tool a nine out of ten.
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

"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
"The interface is great."
"The most valuable feature of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is we don't have to have dedicated infrastructure on-premise because it is cloud-based."
"Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent."
"It is stable, and the performance is good."
"Their remote management (RMM) is very good."
"The detection capabilities for malicious activities are effective."
"It is a stable solution...The solution's technical support is good."
"The product is quite user-friendly."
"The endpoint security, antivirus and firewall are the most valuable features of Trellix Endpoint Security."
"The reporting capabilities are a valuable feature. In enables more visibility on our network."
"Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best."
"Would benefit with the addition of DLP features."
"The initial setup is straightforward, not complex."
"It is easy to use, flexible, and stable. Because it is a cloud-based solution and it integrates all endpoints of the cloud, we can do an IOC-based search. It can search the entire enterprise and tell us the endpoints that are possibly compromised."
 

Cons

"Needs a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether it's valid."
"We do get the odd false positive when we're trying to install the software."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense can improve by including the intrusion and prevention system not only on their most expensive platform. Additionally, it blocks software that is legitimate from users. They complain and then we have to manually unblock the software, by hash, or we receive a message. Some of the prevention features are not available and this might cause us to need a separate firewall or something to protect the company."
"Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is not compatible with certain network devices like access points, switches, or routers, which would be an area for improvement."
"The only part I really don't use as much is their firewall. It's a bit superfluous. Most people have their own firewall in place, so they don't really need that part portion of the solution."
"I would like to see better data protection."
"Occasionally, we suffer from little bugs that give us the wrong message."
"They could have more reports."
"The solution needs to offer better local technical support."
"I would like to see simple processing and reporting online."
"The solution lacks device control."
"Signatures to protect against new attacks."
"It would be a lot easier if I could add multiple user accounts within a single device."
"If there's a possibility for remote assistance or investigation support in the future, it would be beneficial. Currently, we use another remote software for such purposes. If this feature could be included in the next version, that would be an improvement. The feature is called Remote Administration. I'm somewhat satisfied, but there's an issue I recently encountered. When attempting to scan a suspected host machine, Symantec Endpoint Security did not provide any alerts. However, when we installed Malwarebytes and ran a scan, it detected a threat that wasn't identified by Symantec. We raised this concern with the team for resolution, and the investigation is still ongoing."
"We'd like better UI on the management screen."
"Recently, Trellix has introduced a CDR, which involves more manual response than automatic. I believe they should enhance the system by adding features like automated response and the ability to create custom playbooks. This is crucial for an EDR solution, and currently, Trellix lacks this feature while other products offer it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"The licensing is subscription-based and priced well compared to other endpoint security solutions."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."
"The solution is not an expensive tool. Compared to other options, it's mostly average-priced. I've deployed it for customers ranging from 100 nodes to over 5,000 nodes. Its renewal prices are very low, and it offers both perpetual and subscription licenses. With a perpetual license, the product will keep working as long as it's not end-of-life, which benefits companies."
"It is reasonably priced."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint is not very good, and I would rate its cost three out of five, though I won't be able to mention how much its actual price is."
"I would rate the cost as four to five, considering it's normal compared to other products. I find it nominal and worth the money."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and quite reasonable compared to other similar products."
"I don't think there are any extra expenses besides its licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
863,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Hospitality Company
8%
Government
5%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that I like the tool's UI, ease of management, ease of making reports, and the ability to export information easily.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
Although it is not a cheap solution, it is satisfying and functional. It is worth the money and provides good return on investment.
What needs improvement with Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor, however, these issues are common with other vendors, not just WatchGuard.
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...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effective program. Its graphical design is such that it makes an extremely useful too...
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.
 

Also Known As

Panda Security Endpoint Protection, Panda Security for Desktops
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Panda Adaptive Defense 360 vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
863,651 professionals have used our research since 2012.