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) (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
7.4
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 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.
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 initial setup is easy."
"It integrates well into the environment."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"It has absolutely improved the way our organization functions, we are more secure, it is giving us more peace of mind, and it has found malicious activity happening on our endpoints that probably would not have been detected if we didn't have it."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"The stability of the solution is very good, we have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us, and the AI models are good."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"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 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."
"This is a stable product."
"The investigation and rule detection feature of the solution has proven most useful for our company"
"Trellix has a user-friendly interface."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is valuable because we have a Wide Area Network with many sites, and the EDR is cross-site since it is installed and managed from the cloud."
"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 product and the services we have are quite good."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
 

Cons

"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around."
"The onboarding process could be better."
"The complexity and confusion regarding product variants, such as XDR, Forexiant, and Forexon, must be addressed."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"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."
"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."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"The endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"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."
"This is the worst technical support. Without OEM support, you can't handle this product."
"The dashboard is split across different platforms. For example, if you want information on Incident Detection, you have to access one dashboard, and for DLP reporting, there's a separate platform. This fragmentation means you can't access everything from a single dashboard."
"The endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"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 price was fine."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"Very costly product."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"The pricing is average."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The pricing is always high."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"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."
"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."
"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 licensing costs attached to the solution are very easy to manage. There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
886,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

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.
886,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.