We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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."The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"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"
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"They have a great knowledge base that you can leverage as a user."
"Its stability during any heavy performance activity is excellent."
"The product is stable."
"Check Point Harmony Endpoint has one of the most user-friendly dashboards I've seen."
"One of the coolest features is that it provides an HTML report on the laptop and the endpoint console for the administrator."
"Its ease of use is the most valuable feature. We had existing endpoints and it was an easy upgrade process. The interface board is also easy to use."
"The most valuable features of the solution are web protection and threat prevention."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the VPN."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"The installation phase of the solution was very easy."
"The most valuable network security feature is the network sandbox solution. This sandbox feature works on traffic flow."
"It is easy to use, flexible, and stable. Because it is a cloud-based solution and it integrates all endpoints of the cloud, we can do an IOC-based search. It can search the entire enterprise and tell us the endpoints that are possibly compromised."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"The activation of features within ENS and the collection of threats into a single console is a strong point."
"The platform’s most valuable features are ease of use, integration, and deployment."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"The solution is not stable."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Detections could be improved."
"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."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Compared to other brands, we would like a dedicated anti-spam to be included in order to close the full circle."
"I have a few issues when attempting to install Harmony on some of the machines."
"Check Point Harmony Endpoint's agent is a bit heavy."
"I would like to see more automation."
"Its guides are identical to the existing ones. These guides should be updated and they should improve their design."
"We did have some early compatibility issues, which I hope Check Point has since resolved."
"If the IT department is used to "cloning" endpoints (making images) you are going to have a hard time trying to install the product and you are going to end up reading a lot of Check Point documents."
"As I understand there will be a URL filtering feature included with the browser agent in the future. This will allow URL filtering without the need for a Gateway Device. This is something I am looking forward to and would be a great addition to list of features."
"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."
"The way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
"Impacts performance of the servers quite negatively."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"Looking at the current ePolicy orchestrator, and the transition of most vendors to the cloud, they need to do an improvement with the current dashboard or the overall aesthetic of their GUI."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 105 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 49 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas 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. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.