We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiEDR and Trellix Endpoint Security 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)."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us. McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field."
"The solution includes a good combination of features for both signature and signature-less."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"I feel McAfee Endpoint Security to be a good, mature product."
"The solution provides a data view of the Alpha systems with Trellix installs and makes small changes to the central management console. Nothing on the endpoints themselves works, but it focuses more on the management side."
"We really like the dashboard from Trellix and we've found that it's pretty informative."
"It's easy to use."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"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."
"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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution should provide a more easy way to uninstall it on specific stations."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"McAfee Endpoint Protection could improve the word control feature."
"Technical support is an area that can be improved because sometimes, the response time is a bit slow and the explanation is short."
"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."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"The management console is a little bit difficult to understand for admins. You need a lot of time in order to become familiar with that. It is a little bit complicated and not too easy to understand. Its price can also be improved. Its price is higher than its competitors. McAfee also needs to have better cloud integration and more data centers in the EU. The cloud center should be in Europe or in Germany. In Germany, it is really important to have access to your data within the same country. Customer data needs to be placed and processed in the same country."
"The solution takes up a high amount of memory and can cause the system to hang."
Fortinet FortiEDR is ranked 13th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 32 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 96 reviews. Fortinet FortiEDR is rated 7.8, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiEDR writes "A proactive solution that works as a proactive upgrade from a firewall". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Fortinet FortiEDR is most compared with Fortinet FortiClient, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and SentinelOne Singularity Complete.
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.