We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Trellix Endpoint Security 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 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 solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"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 very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"CylancePROTECT is very stable - we've had no issues with performance and no errors or bugs."
"A user can continue to add endpoints and the solution will continue to perform well."
"We are quite security-focused. Blackberry Protect as an endpoint solution for our service really delivers what we are expecting."
"Does malware analysis. Blocks WannaCry and other attacks that have come out."
"I like the AI and mathematical components that they use."
"The most functional item that we use is the process to turn off the false flags that it causes."
"The Application Guard and ByteGuard are useful features."
"The thing that I like is that they have gathered almost all the products in one management server, the ePolicy Orchestrator."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
"The manageability of the product itself is its most valuable aspect. You have the underlying EPO, and on top of it, you can deploy the various components as you require. This is unlike other solutions like Symantec where you have to deploy everything or nothing. With this solution, you can choose to only deploy antivirus or only deploy a firewall, or only something else. I choose the components and that deployment is done through EPO. It makes manageability very flexible."
"It also allows multifunctionality within a single platform."
"The central management console is powerful. You can manage endpoints, DLP, encryption, and all the other features from a single console."
"The product’s stability and security features enhance user protection and organizational security."
"Dynamic Application Containment."
"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."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"Additionally, their channel management has been lacking, with a notable disregard for small and medium-sized businesses, focusing primarily on large enterprises and very large MSPs."
"CylancePROTECT could be improved in its technical support and communication."
"The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"It's a good solution but some features just need to be updated."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections."
"I would like to have the ability to have more control over the deployment in the next release. If you have this console in the cloud, you cannot make pilot groups for deploying the agents. We only have the current group. So, as soon as you inject the software, it will go directly into production, which doesn't work for us. We need to build up pilot groups slowly. We already requested to have this feature on the cloud, and we are still waiting."
"The local technical support could be better."
"The resolution time should be faster."
"There are certain shortcomings in the features concerning DLP in Trellix, where certain additions must be made in the future."
"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."
"The price of the solution is high in Asia."
"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."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 96 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Trellix Endpoint Security 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.