We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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."The setup is pretty simple."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"It is stable and scalable."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The stability is very good."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"It's good that it periodically scans all my drives. I can stay up to date with the status of my drivers and update them if needed."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"Provides protection against threats."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"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."
"The extendability is great."
"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."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"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 support needs improvement."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"The price of McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"Looking at the current ePolicy orchestrator, and the transition of most vendors to the cloud, they need to do an improvement with the current dashboard or the overall aesthetic of their GUI."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"The way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Trellix Active Response is ranked 57th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), 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 Elastic Security. See our Trellix Active Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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.