We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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."Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"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."
"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."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."
"Trellix has a user-friendly interface."
"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 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."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"The product is user-friendly."
"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."
"The performance is good."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The threat scanning is excellent. It uses predictive technology and I can utilize attack data to help us fine-tune our systems and network infrastructure. This protects us against current and future attacks."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"The solution is not stable."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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"
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
"The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Performance is a problematic area in the solution needing improvement."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"Upgrading to new versions isn't easy and it can take a long time. Also, other solutions' tamper protection features are better than FireEye's. Clients should have access to our local information, but they shouldn't change settings on the system itself."
"The product needs to reduce the usage of RAM and CPU."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Trend Vision One, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR and SentinelOne Singularity Complete. See our Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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.