We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Trend Vision One 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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"It is stable and scalable."
"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"
"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."
"The product is user-friendly."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution and very easy to use."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"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."
"Its detection rate is valuable. It is really an easy product to install and manage. It is quite effective at what it does, and if needed, it can also be co-managed, which means 24 hours and seven days a week monitoring through a SOC."
"It is a stable product. It works very well."
"The most valuable feature is the network protection shield on every server, which isolates attacks and prevents our clients from being affected."
"We can scale the product as needed."
"We've found the pricing to be reasonable."
"I can prevent my environment from different types of attacks based on what I see in the Vision One console."
"It helps a lot to understand where the threat is coming from, where is it going, how is it being dealt with, et cetera."
"It helps us with investigations."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Detections could be improved."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is not stable."
"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."
"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 CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"The technical support must be improved."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"When you deploy these tools from Trend Micro, the integration and getting them to work together, are among the more difficult pieces of the puzzle. But when you get that set up and working, you're glad you did."
"The area for improvement is mobile security. We have just finished a proof of concept for Zero Trust Secure Access. We withdrew from this PoC because it does not have that many points for proxy across Europe. Our organization is across Europe... At this time, they are only located in Germany and the UK."
"I think that continued optimization of the environment towards automation and orchestration, a kind of layer that sits underneath all of the technologies, would be extremely important."
"The deployment process could be more streamlined over the existing infrastructure, as it was not as easy as we thought."
"The product needs to have a lot more maturity, and they need to improve the overall technical support framework for getting the value out of XDR."
"They have a DLP module in Tredn Moicros and they need to enhance its capabilities."
"While the continuous addition of features is commendable, the sheer volume of changes makes it difficult to stay abreast of the latest developments."
"The solution only supports Windows and Mac. It would be helpful if it could support other OS, such as Linux."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews while Trend Vision One is ranked 5th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 42 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4, while Trend Vision One is rated 8.6. 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 Trend Vision One writes "The integration of toolsets is key, enabling automation, and vendor has been tremendous partner for us". Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Trend Vision One is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender XDR, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vs. Trend Vision One report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.