No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

N-able EDR vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
N-able EDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Detection ...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
23rd
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able EDR is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)1.1%
N-able EDR0.7%
Other94.8%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
NM
Senior Operations Specialist at Tagit cc
Reporting effectiveness and advanced AI capabilities improve threat awareness while needing pricing simplification and licensing self-service
With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process. If they could bundle it as one solution and show the capabilities or features, they would be able to sell it more effectively, and as resellers, we could sell it to customers more easily. The technical support is responsive, but sometimes we experience limitations regarding the ability to add licensing. They could implement a self-service platform for assigning new licenses or ordering more. Currently, we depend on contacting someone who sends a new contract to sign through the process. They could change their licensing model, though I am not the right person to comment on functionality. On the reporting side, everything is covered.
CESARCASTRO - PeerSpot reviewer
Committee Of IT Cybersececurity at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
Cross-site threat hunting has improved visibility and supports proactive incident response
I believe this is a product in evolution. I do not think it is a final tool to conduct forensics or information forensics of the incidents or information incidents that could arise in our network infrastructure. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is interesting and is a very good entry point that has been evolving through the last years. In the next two months, I have a new contract, and we are pointing out to have an XDR solution with NDR and EDR together. I do not have enough time to do it because I am the manager. However, my coworkers do not understand it yet. I have a contract with a third-party company that is making reports around that, but also they do not have enough experience or enough utility of this. It would be interesting if I have a notification system from EDR. For example, if I am the manager, it would be interesting to have a warning, alarm, or something around that which could call me to get into the system and the dashboard to see what is happening. For example, if it is a high-level threat. However, most of them are just advisory or warnings. I do not enter the tool frequently. I guess I access it once every three months.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the low consumption of system resources. The solution uses a lot of AI and machine learning."
"If you are looking to deploy a security solution as a whole, this is a good option."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"The behavior-based detection feature is valuable."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"The most valuable feature, which I can describe as the '360 vision' of the inventory device, provides a complete view of all the devices."
"The most valuable feature, which I can describe as the '360 vision' of the inventory device, provides a complete view of all the devices."
"We have been using this solution for quite some time, and the AI functionality is quite advanced; we are able to provide insights on different aspects and read the reports easily."
"It provides visibility and a storyline to track the virus or malware's activities, showing infected processes and changes made."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us, and the AI models are good."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features."
"The solution is scalable and the product has a good strategy when everything is in place."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"The dashboard makes it easier and more effective to analyze data."
"It has been helpful in terms of identifying unknown threats."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"The most useful features are behavior monitoring, DLP, and access control. The automation has gotten much better in the last two years than when it was McAfee. It works better now and integrates more smoothly."
 

Cons

"They are charging for Network Traffic Analyzer (NTA) services, so if the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"If you compare it to SentinelOne, which has more functionalities and detection capabilities on an open platform, the pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks."
"Currently, we are monitoring all USB drives and ports but we would like to improve our device control capabilities."
"If Palo Alto reduces the pricing slightly for their products, it would make them more scalable in markets such as India and globally for cybersecurity."
"For working with the solution, you only really need a web browser, however, we've found that working on Chrome, for example, is horrible."
"Concerning the license, if I add one more device without a license, it will automatically subscribe to a license. I do not appreciate that."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process."
"I would like to see them add support for both Android and iOS smartphones."
"I would rate the scalability as seven out of ten. The capability is useful. Concerning the license, if I add one more device without a license, it will automatically subscribe to a license. I do not appreciate that."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
"The endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity."
"Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month."
"When it comes to some unknown fileless attacks, the tool is not able to detect them properly, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The tools are not useful for that."
"The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues."
"I remember doing many tickets for Trellix support, and my EDR was not properly functioning. I didn't feel the detection or the real protection."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"The price was fine."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"The pricing is average."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"Pricing is a problem in South Africa. It could be cheaper here. The rand-to-dollar exchange rate makes it expensive for us. A 25 dollar endpoint cost becomes quite significant when converted to rand."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The licensing costs attached to the solution are very easy to manage. There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is not that expensive, but it's not something that a startup could buy. Pricing for it is for midsized businesses. There's an additional payment if you want data retention for more than thirty days. They gave us data retention for thirty days. Then if you want longer data retention, they have the paid option for a three-month data retention period and for a one-year data retention period."
"The price is reasonable."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
885,837 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Transportation Company
13%
Healthcare Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise48
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What needs improvement with N-able EDR?
With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process. If t...
What is your primary use case for N-able EDR?
We are using N-able EDR, but I think Sophos makes sense because of the environment we operate in. The localization an...
What advice do you have for others considering N-able EDR?
I am more focused on operations and procurement. The decision to use this solution was made before I joined the compa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
I pay for what we get. But the service level from my partner company is not enough to overcome a complex case.
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
I believe this is a product in evolution. I do not think it is a final tool to conduct forensics or information foren...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Sutherland Global Services
Find out what your peers are saying about N-able EDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,837 professionals have used our research since 2012.