We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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 product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"The performance is good."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front."
"The technical support services are good."
"The seamless deployment is very valuable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"The most valuable feature, in my opinion, is the dimension logging platform and the network traffic filtering."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"The interface is very good."
"The tool provides automated responses."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution is not stable."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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 complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"We'd like better UI on the management screen."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"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."
"You do not have access to all the features when you use the Trellix web interface. For example, you cannot do device or drive encryption from the web interface. Also, when we're working with customers, it's sometimes challenging to get sales support. Delays mean we might lose an opportunity. Lastly, Trellix lacks some documentation about custom features."
"From an improvement perspective, I want everything in the solution to be free."
"Search feature could be made more user-friendly."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"The ease of detecting where an issue is should be improved."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Open EDR, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Darktrace, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Check Point Harmony Endpoint. See our Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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.