We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Impressive detection capabilities"
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Protection is the most valuable feature."
"The installation is easy and it takes approximately a few hours. We are deploying it from a Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) tool. All you need to do is click on it and the installation is complete."
"The most valuable features of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security are remote administration and deployment, comprehensive firewall protection, malware protection, and antivirus."
"We find the protection the solution provides valuable."
"You will always have a backup copy of any policy the Bitdefender user defines."
"It is perfectly stable. We haven't received any complaints from customers regarding stability or performance. It's been smooth sailing so far."
"Virus scan and the ability to remotely install are valuable features. Being able to manage everything in one place and set different policies and rules for different computer types are very useful features. It also has ransomware protection. It is very simple to use, and it is very effective."
"The cloud console is good and the tool is effective in protection."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"The seamless deployment is very valuable."
"If the network has seen something, we can use that to put a block to all the endpoints."
"The tool has contributed to improving our security posture. While it's just one part of our overall solution, it plays a crucial role. As we continue to evolve, we anticipate it becoming even more important alongside other aspects like network behavior and additional metrics."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"The support needs improvement."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Potential areas for improvement could be more accessible and immediate support for critical situations, especially considering the regulatory challenges in healthcare."
"There are compatibility concerns as Bitdefender does not support Windows 7."
"The solution's stability could be better."
"It could be simplified a little bit for firewall rules and blocking specific IP addresses. It would be nice to have an option to upload a CSV or XLSX file of IP addresses to be blacklisted or to be able to specify a range as attempted logins from botnets and people attempting to access network accounts is an increasing issue across the board."
"The live monitoring service from Bitdefender's center is expensive and has room for improvement."
"The security features as per customers' requirements should be improved."
"The solution must be more user-friendly."
"The connection with the controller needs improvement. Some connections are currently unstable."
"The integration and display of the dashboards have to be done better."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"Search feature could be made more user-friendly."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"Sometimes, one might face issues with the scalability of the product. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"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 way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is ranked 28th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 23 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 50 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is rated 8.2, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security writes "Gives a good snapshot of what's going on". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security is most compared with HP Wolf Security, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Seqrite Endpoint Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Defender for Business, 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 Open EDR. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.