We performed a comparison between Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The stability is very good."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that it is easy to use and has good support."
"I have had absolutely no problem with using this solution, it really works well."
"The setup is quite easy."
"The solution can scale well."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is stable."
"It is mostly used for malware detection and antivirus purposes."
"In Symantec, we have found that the most important feature is Application and Device Control."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
"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's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"This is a stable product."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"The product is user-friendly."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"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 EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response could improve the reporting. It is very difficult to create reports from the user interface."
"It is not possible to buy it from the company itself, or resellers in other countries. If it is available, I see that it is offered as part of a larger service. For me, this was not suitable."
"It would be good if it can anticipate zero-day attacks. I don't know how it can be done and if it is even a feature of this product."
"The product doesn’t offer MDM functionality under its current licensing model."
"In the future, it would be nice to have playbooks in the tool, to allow for some of the common activities to be automated. For example, some of the scannings of the malware can be too manual for a specific device. Additionally, a vulnerability manager would be beneficial."
"The solution needs to provide better integration."
"I would like to see better scanning capabilities."
"Technical support is not as good as we expect, and resolving problems should be more timely."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"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."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues."
More Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 25th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 28 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews. Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 7.6, while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response writes "A highly stable and affordable solution for detecting and preventing security threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Multifeatured, with web control, advanced threat protection, and threat prevention capabilities, but its alerting and reporting features need improvement". Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.