We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"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."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The content filtering options are good."
"The product has an easy-to-use EDR module based on signature-based antivirus detection. It is a complete software."
"The pricing is decent."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is security. It has better security than other solutions, such as Symantec."
"The solution is scalable."
"Provides web and DNS protection over https."
"I like the tool’s response to malware and trojans."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky EDR is its simplicity. The console is easy to use and not very complex."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers endpoint protection and helps collect information while also allowing users to investigate malicious files in an IT environment...It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to isolate or quarantine devices and block or detect Ransomware and other well-known tools that are used to exploit vulnerabilities on devices."
"What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"This is a stable product."
"The product is user-friendly."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like better integration with other products."
"They could provide a source of visualization for the product."
"There are some issues with EDR's web policy blocking sites that are marked as exceptions."
"The technical support team should respond in a more timely manner."
"We would like to have better strategic information."
"If it covered more products, it would improve the XDR."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is very heavy on the system resources. It uses a lot of memory and the system can become slow."
"The product should release more frequent updates. The tool needs to improve its scalability as well."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"The solution lacks the ability to integrate with external platforms. In future releases of the solution, I would like to see the solution increase its integration capabilities with external platforms."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"An area for improvement in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the historical search. For example: when you have information on the artifact and a precedent, you want to do a search, and that is a bit lacking in the tool."
"The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2, while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Multifeatured, with web control, advanced threat protection, and threat prevention capabilities, but its alerting and reporting features need improvement". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cynet, IBM Security QRadar and Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.