Netwrix Auditor vs Trellix ESM comparison

"I have found user behavior analysis and the ability to run risk assessments important features. Additionally, the interface and online documentation are very good."

"I am impressed with the tool's reporting feature and notifications."

"Netwrix provides features that no other solution on the market does."

"It maintains audit logs for the duration of time that you wish, as long as you have the storage capacity to do so."

"The most valuable feature is the real-time monitoring."

"The most valuable features of Netwrix Auditor are its affordability compared to similar products and its comprehensive monitoring of admin activities."

"What I find the most valuable about Netwrix Auditor is the way it shows risk. The reports are very clear."

"McAfee as a whole is a good solution."

"It is a good central viewpoint for issues. These can then be investigated in more detail on the subnet server(s)/endpoints."

"The solution's technical support is great."

"The most valuable feature is for the security operation center because it provides visibility of all traffic within the company infrastructure."

"It is easy to use."

"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."

"Trellix ESM is very user-friendly."

"It can be easily deployed with the other solutions."

"There is room for improvement with the introduction of AI functionality."

"The solution lacks self-service on password reset. It also needs to improve its scalability."

"I expect usability features to become more refined over time. I'm interested to see how it evolves and continues to improve."

"An improvement would be if there was an another way to manage the logs besides email because it's not so practical."

"If you buy direct, there is a minimum of 150 licenses that must be procured. The price point and barrier of entry is a little bit higher than it would be if you purchased the solution from an authorized reseller partner, rather than buying it and managing yourself."

"When there are issues I would like remediation to be in one place."

"The Linux compatibility of this solution could be improved."

"There is room for improvements when it comes to the licensing."

"It seems McAfee does test its product before releasing. When we - not only us, other companies also - deploy McAfee, we face multiple issues from the customer side, after which, McAfee reacts and fixes the bugs."

"The support from McAfee ESM could improve. They could improve the speed."

"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."

"We would welcome integrations with some of the new McAfee acquisitions, e.g., behavioural analytics."

"The only issue I have with McAfee is the amount of computer resources that it takes... it's definitely impacting some of the other applications that are running on a computer at the same time."

"The product is mature and needs little improvement, but we could enhance the customized dashboarding based on use cases."

"There's no software support from McAfee."

"The only drawback is that they don't have any packet capturing or network behavior analysis."

"This solution is reasonably priced. I would rate it a nine out of ten."

"There is a license for this solution and we are on an annual license. The price is reasonable."

"The tool's price is fair."

"The licensing cost is based on EPS."

"When compared to IBM Security QRadar and other similar platforms, the pricing of McAfee ESM is reasonable and comparatively less expensive."

"The cost is dependent on the customer's environment and requirements."

"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."

"It is an inexpensive product. We purchase its yearly license."

"The product is slightly expensive."

"The pricing is good, and they are competitive compared to providers such as RSA and IBM QRadar."

"The price is good. It's moderate. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. There are different models available, and they can also be monthly. You can choose monthly or yearly. It's very flexible. If our existing customers exceed the current plan, you can just call McAfee and get it extended."