No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs VIPRE Endpoint Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Trellix Endpoint Security P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
167
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (8th)
VIPRE Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
53rd
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is 3.4%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VIPRE Endpoint Security is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.9%
Trellix Endpoint Security Platform3.4%
VIPRE Endpoint Security0.6%
Other92.1%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
AmitKumar22 - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Manager at Frontier Business systems
Strong endpoint protection has simplified compliance and reduced effort for large user environments
One of the best features of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is its endpoint security, and I have been using it for the last four and a half to five years, so I can say this is one of the best EDR endpoint security solutions I have ever seen. The features that make Trellix Endpoint Security Platform stand out for me are ease of use and analytics, which I really appreciate the most. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform positively impacts my organization, ensuring we are compliant with SOC 2, HIPAA, and all other compliance requirements, so there are no issues with that.
SS
IT Security Analyst at a healthcare company with 11-50 employees
Easy to upgrade and manage but needs better reporting
There just was a lot about it that I didn't like. For blocking certain items, such as USBs, we felt like it was slowing down the network too much. Therefore we utilized a GPO for blocking things like that instead. Our environment was big and I didn't feel like the console did a good enough job. We outgrew the product. I've been asking for a change for a couple of years now, and it finally got approved. In terms of the console, I had over 2000 endpoints in there and there wasn't even a search feature for me to look through them. If I had to find where a policy was I had to sort in alphabetical order to find an endpoint that I wanted. They need to offer a search function within the console - maybe something that shows a "last connected" notice. That way, it's easier to manage obsolete machines that you don't need anymore. They had a very vague setting, like after so many days, when do you want us to remove these, you'd see them. I just wish the console was a little more responsive when I would do commands. The reports could have been better. The product would show a lot of endpoints as not communicating. That was another pain point. We constantly had to run an SQL query to clean up the database as I would know immediately when I was in the console, that it just wasn't being responsive. I could tell I was being given bad data and that we had to clean up the database. As soon as I would clean up that database, it was like a purging of the SQL database and it would become a lot more responsive. The problem was that our environment was too big. We're going through a growth spurt right now. In the end, the solution is small and much better suited for a small business. We would get a lot of false positives and instead of them fixing the false positive, they would just want us to put in an exception, which I didn't care for. The product is based on an older model of signature files. It doesn't use any artificial intelligence or anything. It was slow to refresh the policies and computer scans. The larger we got, the more it became an issue. If a company stayed small, I'm not sure if they would have noticed.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"If you are looking to deploy a security solution as a whole, this is a good option."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"But overall, when we speak about security and protection, they are one of the top providers."
"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"Their XDR agent and their behavioral indicators of compromise (BIOC) are pretty nice. Their managed threat hunting is also pretty nice. They also have WildFire, which is a service for actively looking for malware. It's quite useful."
"The policy configuration is great, the granularity of policies that are available is very helpful, it is straightforward to set up, and it has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"Implementing Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has had a significant impact on my security analyst workload because it becomes much easier."
"Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"It's easy to use."
"Centrally, from just one console, you can block malicious attacks across your environment."
"Rogue Detection is more for detecting and managing systems on our network, and that worked very well for us."
"The platform's most valuable features are AI capabilities and its quick updates."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is used for endpoint protection and protects the files and network against viruses and malware."
"The performance is good."
"Technical support was always very helpful and responsive."
"In general, it was pretty easy to manage."
"It has low overhead as far as machine resources are concerned. Everything runs faster with VIPRE installed versus some of the competitors. It has also been pretty easy to use. It just runs and gives us reports. It also sends us alerts when there is something that we need to look at. It does its job, and you just look at the reports. In other ways, you just forget that it is there."
"It has improved the way our organization functions, made things run faster in our company, and has done a fantastic job of keeping our networks free of virus."
 

Cons

"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"The GUI could be improved."
"I have seen lagging with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. There was one time when we faced a threat actor trying to gain access to our system. When our team utilized the tool, we were all on the same dashboard and we faced a lag issue at that time of around five minutes, which was quite significant."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"They could improve it by providing better manageability for administrators. I need to spend too much time on this right now."
"So far, McAfee MVISION Endpoint ticks off all of our boxes, but its pricing could always be better."
"Because sometimes it makes machines really slow."
"The endpoint has room for improvement because it's restrictive, it's very sensitive. Sometimes it can delete something that you need and so sometimes you have to disable the antivirus."
"The platform needs improvement in terms of handling heavy databases."
"Trellix Endpoint Security needs some improvement in the dashboards. Artificial intelligence also requires improvement to further enhance the product."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
"We would get a lot of false positives and instead of them fixing the false positive, they would just want us to put in an exception, which I didn't care for."
"Their management interface is a little buggy as it will hang up and crash from time to time."
"Their management interface is a little buggy. It requires a few system resources on the management interface. Its reporting can also be better. Overall, the reports are pretty good. They patch some third-party software, but if they can expand what they do for reporting and patch enterprise software, it would be handy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the product is not very economical."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"We pay for the license on an annual basis."
"For each computer that is connected to the server McAfee charges us for each computer based on our license agreement."
"The product is expensive."
"Pricing is reasonable and runs at a cost per user per year."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
"MVISION is intended as an enterprise product and it is priced like one. This solution is within the price range of competitors at the enterprise level."
"Annual license fee is good"
"The current pricing is much better than before because they now offer product-related promotions along with some changes in product licensing. The new pricing model is better than before."
"Its price point has been phenomenal. Our previous solution from Trend Micro was triple the cost of it."
"Its price point has been phenomenal. Our previous solution from Trend Micro was triple the cost of it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
18%
University
9%
Government
5%
Wholesaler/Distributor
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business68
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise67
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deplo...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
I don't have visibility on pricing because it is negotiated by a different team, as I look after the technical side.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
VIPRE Cloud, VIPRE Endpoint Security Cloud Edition, VIPRE Endpoint Security Server Edition
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
College Station ISD, Mid-West Companies, Guardian Network Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs. VIPRE Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,647 professionals have used our research since 2012.