We performed a comparison between Seqrite Endpoint Security Cloud and Trellix Endpoint Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)."Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The solution installs very easily."
"Anyone can use it, the protection is good, and they have all of the features."
"The performance is good."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."
"The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP)."
"We like the management of the ePO, and we like the management console."
"The detection is great and the solution is constantly improving."
"This is a good solution for antivirus and malware protection."
"We can manage everything from the central console and it is very easy."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The support needs improvement."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"The security is too week and needs improvement."
"The tool could provide more advanced protection."
"They can improve its resource consumption, such as memory, and maybe provide better or smaller updates. It always takes a lot of resources, but it has been getting better. I have been using McAfee products for the last 20 years or so, and I know it is getting better."
"If there's a possibility for remote assistance or investigation support in the future, it would be beneficial. Currently, we use another remote software for such purposes. If this feature could be included in the next version, that would be an improvement. The feature is called Remote Administration. I'm somewhat satisfied, but there's an issue I recently encountered. When attempting to scan a suspected host machine, Symantec Endpoint Security did not provide any alerts. However, when we installed Malwarebytes and ran a scan, it detected a threat that wasn't identified by Symantec. We raised this concern with the team for resolution, and the investigation is still ongoing."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"It would be nice if the solution was a bit more stable."
"The solution consumes a lot of end user memory and CPU. Trellix doesn't really focus much on the anti-malware side."
"The solution's documentation is not streamlined and is in bits and pieces, which should be in a single format."
"It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. Their support is also not good and needs improvement."
Seqrite Endpoint Security Cloud is ranked 57th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 1 review while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. Seqrite Endpoint Security Cloud is rated 1.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Seqrite Endpoint Security Cloud writes "Security is too weak and patches or reports are not always generated correctly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Seqrite Endpoint Security Cloud is most compared with Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Norton Small Business, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.