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
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
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)
24th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
27
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 3.9% 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 1.0%, up from 0.9% 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)1.0%
N-able EDR0.7%
Other94.9%
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.
Duncan  Kims - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Advanced detection has reduced targeted attacks and builds daily confidence in our defenses
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a very low false positive rate compared to other products, thus increasing the SOC efficiency in how my team relies on the solution day-to-day.With the best features Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers, ease of SOAR integration helps to automate the IOC distribution, and our security team and management trust the product. Advanced detection capabilities ensure that targeted attacks will be detected and blocked before they arrive at our network. SOAR integration has assisted our security team and management in trusting the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"These days it's machine-learning technology and behavior-based analytics features that make us more secure."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription."
"The product is very good, it has caught a lot of exploits that most products would not."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us, and the AI models 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."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"It provides visibility and a storyline to track the virus or malware's activities, showing infected processes and changes made."
"This is a stable product."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"The dashboard makes it easier and more effective to analyze data."
"It has been helpful in terms of identifying unknown threats."
"Trellix has done a good job reducing threats."
"Trellix has a user-friendly interface."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
 

Cons

"The MAC agent is not as robust feature-wise as the PC version."
"The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"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."
"Concerning the license, if I add one more device without a license, it will automatically subscribe to a license. I do not appreciate that."
"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."
"I would like to see them add support for both Android and iOS smartphones."
"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."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. 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. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"An area for improvement in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the historical search. For example: when you have information on the artifact and a precedent, you want to do a search, and that is a bit lacking in the tool."
"The technical support must be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"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 solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"The pricing is average."
"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."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The pricing is always high."
"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 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 price is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
892,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Transportation Company
12%
Healthcare Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business45
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise48
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise13
 

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?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is very cost-effective, but for small organizations working und...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
One area where Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) can be improved is the lack of device or user mapping.I ...
 

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: April 2026.
892,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.