We performed a comparison between CylancePROTECT and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"Two or three years ago when the WannaCry virus struck, the people that were on Cylance were the ones that weren't affected."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"What I like best about CylancePROTECT is its accuracy, as it doesn't give many false positives."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"The CylancePROTECT agent is very low on CPU usage, so it has virtually no adverse impact on my servers, desktops, or workstations."
"It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating."
"It actively monitors the behavior and activity of processes and will, without hesitation, terminate at root anything it determines to be suspect."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The performance is good."
"It's a stable solution with good performance."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"Technical support is excellent."
"Trellix Endpoint Security has a full suite of DLP."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"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."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"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."
"rom my experience interacting with the primary or the central administrative console, it's quite complex. You would need a fair bit of technical experience to set it up, implement and maintain it. That would be one area for improvement."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"The stability could be improved."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"CylancePROTECT's dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"It was not effective. There were a lot of false positives, even when we use Adobe, and everybody uses Adobe, which is not a threat."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"Work on the math model. We are catching a lot of false positives, which gets to be a pain at the start of a deployment."
"The product is consolidating its portfolio into one product. It is difficult at the moment."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing. The price should be improved, it's high."
"It is a very heavy tool, unfortunately."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve by an overall simplification of the solution."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 49 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security, 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 Open EDR. See our CylancePROTECT vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.