Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs Trellix Advanced Threat Defense comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 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

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (12th)
Trellix Advanced Threat Def...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is 2.2%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Advanced Threat Defense is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series2.2%
Trellix Advanced Threat Defense2.1%
Other95.7%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

AV
Cyber security consultant at L&T Technology Services
Enhance cybersecurity for large enterprises using advanced threat management
An improvement could be the integration of security intelligence with Palo Alto cloud via APIs. This would allow IOCs, domains, and hash values to be automatically entered, reducing manual entry. Integration with CSIRT across all use levels would make it easier for administrators to stay updated on the blocked entities without manual intervention.
PP
RSSI at SDIS49
Ensuring long-term reliability while seeking internal email management enhancements
Prisma is a commercial name of the firewall now, but we don't work with the cloud product. Only our company is using it and we do not recommend it to customers. For us, it's transparent because it's a cloud product, so we don't really know the version as it's always updated. We have not had any problem, but it's difficult to report on what's going on because some days they can wash out perhaps 100 mails, and then it's difficult to say how many attacks you have reached. The right email has been washed out and then nobody has complained. We do not use the Threat Visualization feature; as we are in MX, the mail is washed out before it is in the mail inbox of the user, thus avoiding any problem requiring a reservation. In fact, there is no integration with existing security frameworks. The only problem we can have is that as we have no API interface, there is no inspection of internal mail. I rate Trellix Advanced Threat Defense a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Palo Alto’s Panorama centralized management system simplifies our security posture based on our requirements. Instead of manually pulling logs, then generating them into readable formats, it gives us the console in a readable format to view."
"In AWS, Palo Alto provides us a better view than flow logs for network traffic."
"It is an easy-to-scale product."
"Using Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we were able to deploy a single point of management and visualization of the firewall infrastructure in cloud, on-premise and integrated with Azure to automate scale up. Its security features, i.e. anti-malware, threat prevention, URL Filtering, VPN, and antivirus are the most valuable. The ID-User integrated with AD and 2FA features are also very useful to provide secure access to servers and some users in the company. "
"The most valuable features are security and support."
"It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are."
"It helps in offering advanced protection against malware and anti-spyware, which is based on customer feedback stating the product has very good threat prevention capabilities."
"The filtering feature is good."
"I recommend this solution because of its ease of use."
"It stops in excess of twenty-five malware events per month, all of which could be critical to the business."
"The fact that in 10 years, we have had no problem is the most valuable feature for us; it's really a washing machine, but the only problem we face is that it's difficult to report on this product."
"Provides good exfiltration, and is an all-in-one product."
"The most valuable features are the administration console and its detection and response module."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Its greatest strength is the DXL client which can rapidly disseminate attack information to all clients via the McAfee Agent instead of going through the ePO server."
"It is very scalable."
 

Cons

"In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"The scalability could be improved further."
"When managing the firewall, it involves a Strata Cloud web browser that requires improvement to enhance deployment ease and call center efficiency."
"They made only a halfhearted attempt to put in DLP (Data Loss Prevention)."
"The solution needs to have more easily searchable details or documentation about it online, so it's easier to Google if you have queries."
"There are some deficiencies in Palo Alto Networks VM-Series. Having those features missing, we are not proposing Palo Alto Networks VM-Series to all customers."
"The implementation should be simplified."
"There could be a tool that automatically updates all-new Microsoft IPs, which are available for free to connect to the client."
"This solution needs to be made "cloud ready"."
"Lacks remote capabilities not dependent on the internet."
"Make the ATD system a part of the whole product and take the whole thing onto the cloud. While it is there already, it is not to the same level as the on-premise version."
"The initial setup was industry standard complex. It takes awhile and has a lot of planning involved. It could be simplified with product redesign."
"I would like to see future versions of the solution incorporate artificial intelligence technology."
"We'd like them to be better at dealing with script threats."
"The only problem we can have is that as we have no API interface, there is no inspection of internal mail."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is cheaper than the on-premise version."
"The VM series is licensed annually."
"Palo Alto definitely needs to be more competitive compared to other products. The problem that I have faced is that the price of licensing is very high and not very competitive."
"It is an expensive product."
"When you have a client compare box against box, a lot of times Palo Alto is a bit more expensive, but its network firewalls have a very rich ratio."
"One of the factors for selecting Palo Alto was they had flexible pricing. They had a pay-as-you-go model. Comparable to other products, such as Check Point, the price point was definitely a plus."
"The price of this solution is very high for some parts of Africa, which makes it a challenge."
"The license fee is slightly high."
"The product is expensive, but it is better than the rest of them in the industry."
"Our licensing fees for this solution are approximately one million dollars per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,928 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
University
6%
Government
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Performing Arts
11%
University
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business29
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Features comparison between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most. PA is good at app control, web filtering a...
How does Azure Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks VM Series?
Both products are very stable and easily scalable. The setup of Azure Firewall is easy and very user-friendly and the overall cost is reasonable. Azure Firewall offers a solid threat awareness, can...
What do you like most about McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
I recommend this solution because of its ease of use.
What needs improvement with McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
I would like to see an API interface for internal email and control of outgoing email to make it closer to 10. It's necessary; today we have an MX interface, and it would be interesting to have an ...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
We are working with Palo Alto products, specifically firewalls. We are only using Palo Alto Firewalls and not Cortex. With FireEye and Trellix, we only work with ETP now because the NDR function wh...
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee Advanced Threat Defense
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Warren Rogers Associates
The Radicati Group, Florida International University, MGM Resorts International, County Durham andDarlington NHS Foundation Trust
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs. Trellix Advanced Threat Defense and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,928 professionals have used our research since 2012.