We performed a comparison between N-able EDR and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is stable and scalable."
"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."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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 most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers endpoint protection and helps collect information while also allowing users to investigate malicious files in an IT environment...It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Trellix has a user-friendly interface."
"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution is not stable."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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"
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"An area for improvement in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the historical search. For example: when you have information on the artifact and a precedent, you want to do a search, and that is a bit lacking in the tool."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
N-able EDR is ranked 56th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews. N-able EDR is rated 0.0, while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of N-able EDR writes "Stable, effective rollback feature, and useful AI models". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Multifeatured, with web control, advanced threat protection, and threat prevention capabilities, but its alerting and reporting features need improvement". N-able EDR is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint, Elastic Security and Cisco Secure Endpoint, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.
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.