We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"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 main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"It is easy to use, flexible, and stable. Because it is a cloud-based solution and it integrates all endpoints of the cloud, we can do an IOC-based search. It can search the entire enterprise and tell us the endpoints that are possibly compromised."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"The independent modules are very good."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"Trellix integrates well with most SIEM and data classification solutions."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"WatchGuard is very user-friendly. It provides us with all of the security services we need."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The analytics are important because if there is an abnormality then it provides that information to us."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The tool provides automated responses."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"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"
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"You do not have access to all the features when you use the Trellix web interface. For example, you cannot do device or drive encryption from the web interface. Also, when we're working with customers, it's sometimes challenging to get sales support. Delays mean we might lose an opportunity. Lastly, Trellix lacks some documentation about custom features."
"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."
"If you have another endpoint product running on the same machine, you have to fine tune functions from FireEye to avoid performance and user experience issues."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"Upgrading to new versions isn't easy and it can take a long time. Also, other solutions' tamper protection features are better than FireEye's. Clients should have access to our local information, but they shouldn't change settings on the system itself."
"The solution lacks device control."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"It can have a couple of false positives, but after you add them to your allow list, it works fine. It could have better Mac support. I am pretty sure it doesn't have much support for Mac. It can be installed on a Mac, but it is not that good."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"I'd like a few extra features, especially around threat severity assessment."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". 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, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Vision One and Huntress. See our Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response 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.