We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The stability is very good."
"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"
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The initial setup of Trellix Endpoint Security was straightforward."
"The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use."
"Dynamic Application Containment."
"McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is stable. We don't have any bugs being reported."
"The product helps us by contacting us if there are any virus attacks on our system."
"The reporting capabilities are a valuable feature. In enables more visibility on our network."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"It has a very simple like multi-tenancy option and scalability is outstanding."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution is not stable."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"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."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"Trying to move away from the signature model for antivirus and malware blocking is something that would be nice. Instead of having to update every day, which is signature-based, moving to more of a kernel or architecture-based model would probably be beneficial."
"Currently, Trellix Endpoint Security can't find the running mutexes, while other open-source products can do it."
"I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security."
"An area of improvement for this solution is to make it easier to manage."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. Their support is also not good and needs improvement."
"With McAfee, if there is a zero-day vulnerability, you have to download the patch for it from the McAfee website, then apply it to your endpoint."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.