Tanium vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

"I find the inventory and compliance features of Tanium to be the most impressive."

"Tanium is a very good product and I would rate it eight or nine out of ten."

"Threat hunting is a very good feature on Tanium. We have just started using it and have not used it extensively."

"Tanium has made the process of detecting threats more proactive with its detection. So, the process is easier and more efficient."

"The solution is scalable and helps to understand how infrastructure works. It helps to improve the health of the organization."

"For incident response tasks, all these tasks can get done in minutes with minimal disruption to the end-user."

"Tanium's most valuable feature is its instant discovery aspect."

"The security features are very valuable."

"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."

"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to isolate or quarantine devices and block or detect Ransomware and other well-known tools that are used to exploit vulnerabilities on devices."

"It relies on external systems for detection and then asks the endpoint to handle blocking. However, the most crucial feature is its investigative capabilities. With real-time search and other functionalities, it enables comprehensive detection and response."

"The most useful features are behavior monitoring, DLP, and access control. The automation has gotten much better in the last two years than when it was McAfee. It works better now and integrates more smoothly."

"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."

"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers endpoint protection and helps collect information while also allowing users to investigate malicious files in an IT environment...It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."

"The product and the services we have are quite good."

"Trellix has done a good job reducing threats."

"The solution can give a lot of false positives."

"Any movement into a SaaS solution has challenges since the processes and data flows are not well defined. Hence, you need to build it at the same time."

"Tanium’s scalability could be improved."

"They could improve the UI."

"When working with Tanium, there are some older devices that haven't been patched for a long time, and certain patches are not included in Tanium."

"Tanium's limitations should be improved because although it is a great tool, it is limited to only a few classes during a session."

"It is not really additional functions, or the features that are needed, rather the complexity would be reduced based on the number of modules required to put together a comprehensive operational security and risk compliance model."

"The most painful thing is the interface. It's a bit unclear sometimes."

"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."

"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."

"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."

"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."

"When it comes to some unknown fileless attacks, the tool is not able to detect them properly, making it an area where improvements are required."

"The solution lacks the ability to integrate with external platforms. In future releases of the solution, I would like to see the solution increase its integration capabilities with external platforms."

"The technical support must be improved."

"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."

"It is higher than some competitors in the market."

"The product's pricing differs from region to region depending on negotiations and the number of endpoints."

"The solution is expensive but it's a good investment."

"Tanium is a more expensive solution in Latin America than some of the competitors, such as BigFix."

"There is an annual license required to use this solution."

"It's an expensive solution. It would be nice if the cost were lower."

"The solution offers value for money."

"Pricing is a problem in South Africa. It could be cheaper here. The rand-to-dollar exchange rate makes it expensive for us. A 25 dollar endpoint cost becomes quite significant when converted to rand."

"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is not that expensive, but it's not something that a startup could buy. Pricing for it is for midsized businesses. There's an additional payment if you want data retention for more than thirty days. They gave us data retention for thirty days. Then if you want longer data retention, they have the paid option for a three-month data retention period and for a one-year data retention period."

"McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users."

"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."

"The product’s pricing is reasonable."

"The licensing costs attached to the solution are very easy to manage. There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs."

"The price is reasonable."

"The cost is okay, compared to other products."