We performed a comparison between Open EDR and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"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."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"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 solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"Comodo includes a firewall and antivirus in one solution. I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems. Comodo can even find a lost device and secure it remotely."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"The seamless deployment is very valuable."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"Detections could be improved."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution is not stable."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Comodo includes a firewall and antivirus in one solution. I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems. Comodo can even find a lost device and secure it remotely."
"Impacts performance of the servers quite negatively."
"I hope the solution can be used in cloud systems going forward."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve by an overall simplification of the solution."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
"Upgrading to new versions isn't easy and it can take a long time. Also, other solutions' tamper protection features are better than FireEye's. Clients should have access to our local information, but they shouldn't change settings on the system itself."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Open EDR is ranked 46th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 1 review while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Open EDR is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Open EDR writes "I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems, and the fact that there is an open source version". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Open EDR is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sangfor Endpoint Secure, Trend Micro Apex One and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus, 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 SentinelOne Singularity Complete.
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.