We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is pretty simple."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Scalability is good."
"We have found the pricing to be reasonable."
"One reason why I have stuck with Sophos is because it grabs it and deals with it, and if it's known malware, it can quarantine it or delete it."
"The base product and the anti-malware feature are most valuable."
"This is really good because it's applicable to zero-day threats."
"The most valuable feature of Intercept X its ability to stay ahead of the infection. By the time the ransomware spreads to the next machine in line, the data has already been encrypted on that workstation. It didn't matter what the ransomware did because could go in and get it back."
"After that, the client switched to Sophos to get the protection they lacked. It either works or it doesn’t and Sophos works."
"Solution for endpoint detection and response, with good stability and scalability. Users also benefit from email protection and data loss prevention."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front."
"Provides protection against threats."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"Provides good mobile device protection."
"The extendability is great."
"It is very valuable in finding out unknown malware."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Detections could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The performance is very slow and should be faster."
"There are not any solutions that are a 10 out of 10. A 10 would be perfect protection with no impact on the performance of the device. This is not the case, there is some impact on the performance of the device."
"The endpoint detection and response (EDR) technology has room for improvement because the information that it gives us to resolve our problems is poor nowadays."
"The policies could be nicer to manage."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability and updates."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"Technical support can be improved. There could be shared support, i.e. where someone in Egypt can respond."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"The integration and display of the dashboards have to be done better."
"Looking at the current ePolicy orchestrator, and the transition of most vendors to the cloud, they need to do an improvement with the current dashboard or the overall aesthetic of their GUI."
"The product needs to reduce the usage of RAM and CPU."
"We'd like better UI on the management screen."
"The solution can be expensive."
"Most of these types of solutions including others, such as Carbon Black and FortiEDR, all have the same features. However, Carbon Black is the leader when it comes to being robust and user-friendly and this solution should improve in those areas to stay more competitive."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 96 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 17th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 46 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Seqrite Endpoint Security, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our Intercept X Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors and best EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) 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.