We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Trend Vision One 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 solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"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."
"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."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"It has been scalable."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"Scaling is not a problem at all."
"We had a quick deployment. The solution is easy to set up."
"It helps a lot to understand where the threat is coming from, where is it going, how is it being dealt with, et cetera."
"XDR provided a much more deep view into what is actually happening."
"For our day-to-day use cases, the correlation and attribution of different alerts are valuable. It is sort of an SIEM, but it is intelligent enough to run the queries and intentionally detect and prioritize attacks for you. At the end of the day, it is different data that you see. It correlates data for you and makes it meaningful. You can see that someone got an email and clicked a link. That link downloaded, for example, malware into the memory of the machine. From there, you can see that they started moving laterally to your environment. I quite like it because it gives visibility, so Workbench is what we use every day"
"I like XDR's workbench feature and observed attack technique. It generates an alert once certain conditions are met. For example, let's say there's a threat called malicious.exe being deployed on your system. It will generate an alert with information like the file path, location, hash, etc. You also see a relational matrix showing how that file was executed and which processes were installed."
"I can prevent my environment from different types of attacks based on what I see in the Vision One console."
"Trend Micro XDR is a comprehensive solution that is not overly complex to use or manage."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The solution is not stable."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"I would like to see the workflow, to get all the rules and policies set up, be less complicated."
"In new versions I would like to see better implementation of the reporting features, especially in regards to EDR visibility."
"A room for improvement is Trend Micro XDR's website. It's a very complicated website since finding the right point one wants to see is difficult."
"It would be ideal if they could improve the control of connectivity between sensors."
"I think that continued optimization of the environment towards automation and orchestration, a kind of layer that sits underneath all of the technologies, would be extremely important."
"The zero trust is a bit complicated compared to other parts of the solution."
"The price could be lower."
"The agent system is very slow, it needs to improve its performance."
"The information captured by Trend Vision One needs to be more detailed."
Digital Guardian is ranked 29th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 11 reviews while Trend Vision One is ranked 5th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 42 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Trend Vision One is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Vision One writes "The integration of toolsets is key, enabling automation, and vendor has been tremendous partner for us". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Trend Vision One is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Apex One, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender XDR and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Digital Guardian vs. Trend Vision One report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.
