We performed a comparison between Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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 stability is very good."
"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."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is security. It has better security than other solutions, such as Symantec."
"The most valuable feature is Endpoint's management."
"We can scale the solution."
"The integration with our hypervisor is quite smooth, especially within the Kaspersky Enterprise environment. We have many virtual machines, and the integration is helpful."
"Version 14.0 comes with an SQL database, which gives great flexibility on control, reviewing logs, and viewing history."
"It's scalable enough for us."
"The solution provides high-end security that is critical for financial institutions and bankers."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky EDR is its simplicity. The console is easy to use and not very complex."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pros →
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"The threat scanning is excellent. It uses predictive technology and I can utilize attack data to help us fine-tune our systems and network infrastructure. This protects us against current and future attacks."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"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."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Detections could be improved."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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."
"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 installation process could be more streamlined."
"The license prices for this solution are quite high."
"The solution does not offer much support to its users in Spanish, so I would like to see them offer more support in Spanish."
"I would like to integrate Kaspersky with my Log Collector SIEM. Right now that's not possible."
"It's not a simple implementation."
"Documentation needs to be simplified and improved so that it provides good product awareness for end users."
"If a customer wants to use Kaspersky on-prem, they'll need to spend a lot on the hardware. Their server must be strong because EDR is a heavy product. You need excellent hardware to run it. It might make sense to deploy the solution in the cloud. If they add features, it will only make the product heavier and increase the hardware costs."
"The solution can improve by providing automatic fixing of vulnerabilities and reducing the resources used in the server component and endpoint agent. They are very bulky and use a lot of CPU, memory, and hard drive resources."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Cons →
"Performance is a problematic area in the solution needing improvement."
"The solution can be expensive."
"It is a very heavy tool, unfortunately."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
"The product needs to reduce the usage of RAM and CPU."
"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."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
More Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is ranked 17th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 44 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is rated 8.2, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert writes "Solid security and performance; overall a useful tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is most compared with Trend Vision One, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cynet, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Bitdefender GravityZone 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 Open EDR. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert 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.