We performed a comparison between Symantec Data Loss Prevention and Trellix DLP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Users like the product because of its simplicity and the rate of detection."
"The most valuable feature is file-level DLP."
"It is a scalable solution...The solution's technical support was good."
"There's only one policy needed to implement for all channels."
"Symantec Data Loss Prevention is the number one product in its field. It does its job well and it has all the necessary features. It is definitely better than any other solution on the market."
"The most valuable features of Symantec Data Loss Prevention are endpoint security, endpoint agent, and DLP. Additionally, we have been satisfied with the policies."
"The tool's really working well, and the agents are good."
"The accuracy in terms of the rate of detection is good."
"The tool has prebuilt templates for data classification. It is easier for customers to get started."
"Trellix can transfer the data through the cloud. The storage device control is an important feature."
"Scalability is feasible since it's on-premises. It's easy to scale there."
"It is a very stable solution."
"It prevents enterprises from installing external software and devices and can block specific network pathways."
"We want a more proactive reporting structure."
"Agent configuration should be improved for easier interaction for users, particularly by allowing configuration changes to be done on a grid."
"They need to expand the channels they check."
"Sometimes setting up the solution can get a little tricky because it would depend on your internal infrastructure. For example, you have to connect the Symantec Data Loss Prevention platform and you need to integrate it, so that could make the process somewhat difficult."
"Their support program needs a lot of improvement. If you are stuck somewhere, getting their support can be difficult."
"Symantec could be better with infrastructure."
"The product must improve its interface."
"There are some features that are not available which are required by every data loss prevention solution."
"In future releases, I would like to see like to see encryption available on the cloud-based version."
"Trellix needs to improve customer support."
"The whole UI of the server console installed on the standalone computers is hefty."
"Trellix is incompatible with Linux, and its DLP part is incompatible with Mac. Sometimes, it does not work on Windows, either."
"The support team's response time during the night is an area of concern where improvements are required."
More Symantec Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Data Loss Prevention is ranked 3rd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 53 reviews while Trellix DLP is ranked 21st in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 5 reviews. Symantec Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0, while Trellix DLP is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Symantec Data Loss Prevention writes "Consitent, accurate, and simple". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix DLP writes "Comes in a single console: Emission, endpoint security, everything in one product, one agent". Symantec Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, Zscaler DLP and Trend Micro Integrated Data Loss Prevention, whereas Trellix DLP is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Varonis Platform, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP). See our Symantec Data Loss Prevention vs. Trellix DLP report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) 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.
