We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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 detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"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."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The stability is very good."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"Technical support is always available and very helpful."
"Initially, the DLP was very valuable for disabling access to USB drives."
"McAfee EndPoint Security has a lot of good features that work well if they are implemented properly."
"The solution provides a data view of the Alpha systems with Trellix installs and makes small changes to the central management console. Nothing on the endpoints themselves works, but it focuses more on the management side."
"The product has a robust reporting feature"
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"We really like the dashboard from Trellix and we've found that it's pretty informative."
"When Intel acquired McAfee they worked on the protocol so that all vendors can work on the same platform. It's a very big improvement in McAfee. All McAfee products talk to each other. Other vendor's products can join this platform as well so it makes it more powerful on the enterprise side for McAfee."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"Auto-Remediation"
"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."
"The traffic security monitoring, traffic application access feature called the agent, the main feature which is the endpoint security feature are the ones I found valuable. And it also had the in branch security in kind of SD WAN, good three hundred and sixty protection. It is specific and there is ease of deployment also present."
"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."
"Probably, compared to other antivirus programs, what we like about it is it is lightweight."
"I rate the initial setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"It is excellent endpoint protection for mobiles that does everything it says it will."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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 solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly. There are multiple solutions and there is no clear line differentiating all of them. There is a centralized console where we manage everything but most of the administrators feel a little confused when it comes to managing multiple products from a single place."
"There is room to improve with scalability."
"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product."
"McAfee Endpoint Protection could improve the word control feature."
"Its pricing needs to be improved."
"Although they have increased the complexity, it has affected the scanning speed."
"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections."
"The vendor should simplify the way they bundle the products because it's very hard to explain to customers what products contain which features."
"An updated UI would be nice, but is not hardly used."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"Since they're dealing with multi-core environments now, the best option would be for them to enhance the product so that the product can automatically do an assessment on the machine."
"It needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."
"There needs to be more advanced analytics. It would make it a more powerful antivirus solution within the marketplace."
"The only complaint I have with Webroot is its inability to prevent UoD phishing and its inability to check against bots or block anti-attacks. Plus the URL server is in zero-definition."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
"Reporting system could be improved."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 96 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 35th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, HP Wolf Security and Cynet. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection 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.