We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Trellix Endpoint Security is highly valued for its easy administration options and reliability. Reviews suggest that Trellix could reduce resource consumption and improve user-friendliness. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks presents an intuitive interface, advanced identification of risks, expandability, and compatibility with various other solutions. However, Cortex XDR could use enhancements in hard disk encryption, security integration, and customer education.
Service and Support: Some users have found the support for Trellix Endpoint Security helpful and reliable, while others have encountered ineffective assistance and communication problems. Some customers were impressed with Palo Alto support, while others reported mixed experiences.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Trellix Endpoint Security varies in difficulty, depending on the user's experience with McAfee and general technical expertise. Some users thought Cortex XDR’s deployment was fast and straightforward, while others consider it to be a complex and time-consuming task that requires thorough planning.
Pricing: Some find Trellix’s price reasonable and competitive, while others believe it could be lowered. Some reviewers said Cortex XDR is expensive, but others said it was reasonable for the robust feature set Cortex offers.
ROI: Trellix Endpoint Security provides significant time savings. Cortex XDR creates value by ensuring system and data security rather than a financial return on investment.
Comparison Results: Trellix Endpoint Security is preferred over Cortex XDR. Users said Trellix's comprehensive management capabilities enable effortless administration of all programs from a single console. Cortex XDR received mixed reviews for its initial setup, customer service, and pricing.
"I have found the ability to delete unwanted threats beneficial."
"The ability to integrate and observe a more cohesive narrative across the products is crucial."
"There is also one dashboard that shows us the status of many controls at once and the details I can get... It gives a great overview of many areas, such as files, emails, chats, and links. Even with the apps, it gives you a great overview. In one place you can see where you should look into things more deeply..."
"The integration with other Microsoft solutions is the most valuable feature."
"The unified view of the threat landscape on a central dashboard is the most valuable feature."
"My clients like Defender's file integrity monitoring. They're monitoring Windows and Linux system files."
"The advantage of Microsoft Defender XDR has over other XDRs in the market is that it's easy to use. You can quickly differentiate between alerts, incidents, devices, software, etc. It's easier to investigate an incident, and you have so many options. You can automate investigations and use playbooks. There's also the live response session, which is something you can't find in any other XDR."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"The dashboard is customizable."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"There is a new feature where you can set thresholds for all the CPU consumption allowing for no consumption on the servers when the scans happen. It is a separate plugin or addon, and if we have it on all the virtual machines it automatically checks the resources, and based on that, it will schedule the scans. That is something that I have not seen in other antivirus solutions, such as Symantec."
"Initially, the DLP was very valuable for disabling access to USB drives."
"I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to manage the solution from anywhere and having an overview of the companies security."
"I feel McAfee Endpoint Security to be a good, mature product."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"We can manage everything from the central console and it is very easy."
"The detection is great and the solution is constantly improving."
"The endpoint security, antivirus and firewall are the most valuable features of Trellix Endpoint Security."
"The solution does not offer a unified response and standard data."
"The design of the user interface could use some work. Sometimes it's hard to find the exact information you need."
"There are still some components, such as vulnerability management within the vendor product, where improved integration would be beneficial."
"The support could be more knowledgable to improve their offering."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is not a full-fledged EDR or XDR."
"The capability to not only thwart attacks but also to adapt to evolving threats is crucial."
"In the future, it would be beneficial for Microsoft to consider making the product more user-friendly or simplified for those who are interested in using it. Currently, it requires a high level of technical expertise, making it challenging for beginners or less experienced individuals."
"The price could be better. It'll also help if they can continuously update and upgrade the solution. Every day there's a new virus uploaded into the network, and we have to keep updating it to identify all these things."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"The solution needs to offer better local technical support."
"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product."
"On the next release, they should build an easier way to see a repair option within the McAfee icon on your system tray. If there was an issue, you should be able to contact the user or just right-click on "repair". That would be a very good feature to add. That could be a place of improvement, just adding that button, or customizing it."
"An area of improvement for this solution is to make it easier to manage."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"We experienced some bad behavior when we first installed the product. The system also starts slowly in some instances. If for some reason this solution crashes, we could lose all our data."
"The price of the solution is high in Asia."
"The product is not easy to use."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 95 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.