We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Trellix Endpoint Security is highly valued for its easy administration options and reliability. Reviews suggest that Trellix could reduce resource consumption and improve user-friendliness. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks presents an intuitive interface, advanced identification of risks, expandability, and compatibility with various other solutions. However, Cortex XDR could use enhancements in hard disk encryption, security integration, and customer education.
Service and Support: Some users have found the support for Trellix Endpoint Security helpful and reliable, while others have encountered ineffective assistance and communication problems. Some customers were impressed with Palo Alto support, while others reported mixed experiences.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Trellix Endpoint Security varies in difficulty, depending on the user's experience with McAfee and general technical expertise. Some users thought Cortex XDR’s deployment was fast and straightforward, while others consider it to be a complex and time-consuming task that requires thorough planning.
Pricing: Some find Trellix’s price reasonable and competitive, while others believe it could be lowered. Some reviewers said Cortex XDR is expensive, but others said it was reasonable for the robust feature set Cortex offers.
ROI: Trellix Endpoint Security provides significant time savings. Cortex XDR creates value by ensuring system and data security rather than a financial return on investment.
Comparison Results: Trellix Endpoint Security is preferred over Cortex XDR. Users said Trellix's comprehensive management capabilities enable effortless administration of all programs from a single console. Cortex XDR received mixed reviews for its initial setup, customer service, and pricing.
"The most valuable feature is probably the aggregation and correlation of the different telemetry points with Defender for Identity, Defender for Endpoint, and Defender for Cloud Apps. All of these various things are part of that portal. We've wanted that single pane of glass for years."
"The 'Incidents and Alerts' tab is a valuable feature where we can find triggered alerts."
"The integration between all the Defender products is the most valuable feature."
"From the perspective of Microsoft 365 XDR, the main benefit is a single, centralized dashboard offering the holistic visibility organizations crave."
"The threat intelligence is excellent."
"Its most significant advantage lies in its affordability."
"The most valuable feature depends on the scenario. For compliance, I like Microsoft Purview Information Protection and Data Loss Prevention. Sentinel is the most helpful feature for security. 365 Defender helps us prioritize threats across an enterprise. It's a crucial feature for the managed services team."
"I like the easy integration and advanced possibilities. We can implement it at customer sites in a few clicks, but we can also dive deep and drill down to extended features. There's a very good starting point to get into this product and all the features from Defender."
"Cortex XDR is a simple platform that's easy for administrators and users. You have a lot of flexibility to change or customize the features."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"The live terminal is probably the best thing ever. It gives you the access to get straight onto any machine."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"The endpoint protection and disk encryption features are the most valuable."
"We receive good protection with this solution."
"It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts."
"It also allows multifunctionality within a single platform."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"The most valuable features of the solution include DLP (data loss prevention), CASB (cloud access security broker) functionality, endpoint encryption, and cloud workload security."
"McAfee EndPoint Security has a lot of good features that work well if they are implemented properly."
"I like trap prevention DNS and threat prevention."
"The message trace feature for investigating mail flow issues should add more detailed information to the summary report... if they could extend the summary report a little bit, make it more descriptive, ordinary administrators could understand what happened and that the emails failed at this or that point. That way they would know the location to go to try to correct it and to prevent it from occurring again."
"There could be a way to proactively monitor unusual activity ."
"The solution could improve by having better machine learning and AI. Additionally, the interface, documentation, and integration could be better."
"The documentation on their website is somewhat outdated and doesn't show properly. I wanted to try a query in Microsoft Defender 365. When I opened the related documentation from the security blog on the Microsoft website, the figures were not showing. It was difficult to understand the article without having the figures. The figures were there in the article, but they were not getting loaded, which made the article obsolete."
"Support is hit or miss. Microsoft wants you to buy premium support contracts. Though they call themselves professional support, it's almost like throwing questions into a black hole. You get an answer, but it's never helpful."
"The price could be better. It'll also help if they can continuously update and upgrade the solution. Every day there's a new virus uploaded into the network, and we have to keep updating it to identify all these things."
"In the Microsoft Azure Portal, in Active Directory, if there is anything on the user it will provide you with the information, but you still have to go through it a bit. And sometimes, I have experienced difficulties in understanding the information, especially because the synchronization between Microsoft Intune and the devices that are connected to the user in Azure Active Directory takes a lot of time."
"There is definitely scope for improvement in the automation area. Because the solution is a SaaS platform, we don't have the overall ability to automate stuff.... There is no direct way to go ahead because it's a SaaS platform."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"The licensing model is complex to understand. It requires expertise to explain how the licensing works. You need expertise to guide you through the subscription plan."
"Limited remote connection."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"They can make it free, but that's not going to happen."
"They can improve its resource consumption, such as memory, and maybe provide better or smaller updates. It always takes a lot of resources, but it has been getting better. I have been using McAfee products for the last 20 years or so, and I know it is getting better."
"I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"It would be nice if the solution was a bit more stable."
"Trying to move away from the signature model for antivirus and malware blocking is something that would be nice. Instead of having to update every day, which is signature-based, moving to more of a kernel or architecture-based model would probably be beneficial."
"Every time we open a ticket with McAfee, their response differs and they are not consistent."
"The solution could provide open XDR in addition to EDR."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Fortinet FortiEDR, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.