We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response 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 price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"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."
"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."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"The solution is scalable."
"Provides good mobile device protection."
"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."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"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."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
"From an improvement perspective, I want everything in the solution to be free."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"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."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Trellix Active Response is ranked 58th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (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 Elastic Security. See our Trellix Active Response 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.