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

Nyotron PARANOID vs Trellix Endpoint Security Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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 Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Nyotron PARANOID
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
57th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Security P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
168
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (9th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nyotron PARANOID is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is 3.4%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.7%
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform3.4%
Nyotron PARANOID0.5%
Other92.4%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
Abel Browarnik - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Expertos Browarnik
A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection
The initial setup is complex. It is rare to see an effective endpoint protection system that does not require some effort. It is neither on the cloud nor on-premises. You deploy it on every endpoint or server, irrespective of perimeter. You must use a deployment tool unless you prefer to do it manually on every endpoint or server. We used an automation tool to deploy it. Since we had MSI with us. We had to verify that everything worked, but it didn't take more than two weeks for 1000 endpoints.
PankajKumar24 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at Gigabit Technologies Pvt Ltd
Advanced threat prevention has strengthened incident response and customized security workflows
The biggest advantage of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is the ATP solution, which provides advanced threat prevention. Machine learning algorithms are available in the product as part of the threat anti-malware, including predictive machine learning and behavioral analysis, which are integral to the anti-malware module of EPP. In terms of my experience with the machine learning algorithms for analysis and threat detection, we are analyzing logs provided by Trellix, but we are not able to conduct specific machine learning analysis on those logs. The automated response mechanisms in the products help with incident management because we have to create playbooks in Trellix console for automation, which we need to enable. The customizable dashboard of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform definitely contributes to the decision-making process, as we customize the dashboard according to customer requirements. When it comes to integration aspects, we are able to integrate Trellix Endpoint Security Platform with SIEM or SOAR solutions using the ePO console, which enhances threat detection capabilities. Reporting and analytics aspects have an impact on security posture assessment, as we are able to fetch reports in the ePO console customized according to customer requirements for downloading and sending via email.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"Once you become familiar with it, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a more powerful tool and I would say that I prefer it over MDE because it is a stronger tool for me."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"The level of security I get for my endpoints and servers is extremely valuable."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."
"We switched because there were a lot of added features with Palo Alto that Check Point didn't have, and it was an upgrade for us."
"This product really is the best solution for this security issue."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"First of all, it does the job. It prevents harm to the operating system. Also, the visibility it gives to the user and to the administrator is very good."
"McAfee offers an integrated solution, and it covers almost all the possibilities of data loss."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"This is a good solution for antivirus and malware protection."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"I feel McAfee Endpoint Security is a good, mature product, although the price of the technology poses an issue."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
 

Cons

"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"As an improvement, I would like to see enhanced connection speeds."
"One thing that was missing was the integration part. Currently, they don't have out-of-box integration with IBM QRadar, or if they have the integration, the integration doesn't work well."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"Whenever the tool releases a new version when deploying the product across the organization, I feel like there are some disturbances in the CPU usage after upgrading the tool to the latest version."
"The solution should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers. Currently it's only protecting the client side, not the server. If they would add the server in the same solution, that would be great."
"What could be better is the performance impact on some machines and the complexity of configuration."
"Some customers feel that the Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) agent consumes more memory and resources in their environment, which is a major issue we are facing."
"Recently, Trellix has introduced a CDR, which involves more manual response than automatic. I believe they should enhance the system by adding features like automated response and the ability to create custom playbooks. This is crucial for an EDR solution, and currently, Trellix lacks this feature while other products offer it."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"When comparing the solution to others it is a bit expensive."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
Information not available
"I would rate the cost as four to five, considering it's normal compared to other products. I find it nominal and worth the money."
"For each computer that is connected to the server McAfee charges us for each computer based on our license agreement."
"McAfee's prices are flexible and can be quite competitive, although there are other solutions that are even more so."
"This product is costly."
"I do licensing on an annual basis and this is what I always recommend to my clients over the monthly option."
"There's a subscription on a yearly basis. It's not that expensive; it's quite affordable."
"It is a yearly subscription-based product, which includes the license and hardware. There is also a subscription for technical support up to five years."
"Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is not a cheap solution...I don't think any costs are involved in the maintenance of the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
No data available
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business68
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise67
 

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 Nyotron PARANOID?
There was an initial problem, we had to run the system in detection mode rather than prevention mode. The solution sh...
What is your primary use case for Nyotron PARANOID?
We use Nyotron PARANOID to protect endpoints. It serves as a second and last line of protection. It often detects thr...
What advice do you have for others considering Nyotron PARANOID?
They pushed updates frequently. Sometimes, an update breaks functionality, but it is easy to fix. It was an excellent...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deplo...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
I don't have visibility on pricing because it is negotiated by a different team, as I look after the technical side.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
El Al Airlines
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Nyotron PARANOID vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.