We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Endpoint and Trend Micro ServerProtect 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."Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"There are several valuable features including strong prevention and exceptional reporting capabilities."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The most valuable feature is its threat protection and data privacy, including its cyber attack and data protection, as we need to cover and protect data on user devices."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"I am told that we get over 100 million emails a month. This filters them down and allows only somewhere about three million emails, which is a great help."
"Its most valuable features are its scalability and advanced threat protection for customers."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its technical support."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"Performance is very good."
"ServerProtect's best feature is virtual patching, which takes care of patching even if your servers aren't updated with the latest threat definitions."
"Technical support was perfect."
"It can be managed from the cloud."
"It helps us quickly address potential issues and provides us with valuable insights."
"Scalable security solution with virtualization and virtual patching functions, able to provide full security that's specific to the service, e.g. it handles virtual machines better."
"Allows us to protect OneDrive and SharePoint, and emails too."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"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."
"I would like them to add whatever makes filtering more advanced in scanning and blocking for malware in emails."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"One of the things that Cisco Secure Endpoint really needs is that it's not just Secure Endpoint, it's a point product, and I think we really need to move into solution-based selling, designing, and architecting. So that we're not worried about putting things on endpoints and selling 'x' amount of endpoints, but to provide a solution that covers all of the remote access and sell them as solutions that cover multiple things."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"One thing I have been facing is that some fake threats have appeared that even Trend Micro was not able to clear up. It couldn't tell you why these threats are happening, where they are coming from and what the costs are."
"Lacking analytics and a machine learning technique."
"Notifications are not very good with Trend Micro."
"We found that when we push Trend Micro from the console to our client's PCs, we need to manually restart the PC. I have 500 users and the manual input is time-consuming."
"Trend Micro is a little bit complicated when it comes to setting up special policies."
"No built-in vulnerability scanner for management solutions."
"The endpoint protection could always be stronger."
"There are a few areas of improvement. Despite its high performance, there are certain aspects related to the operating system that could be improved. Specifically, I find that the protection for certain actions requires more effort compared to other actions."
Cisco Secure Endpoint is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 45 reviews while Trend Micro ServerProtect is ranked 48th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 13 reviews. Cisco Secure Endpoint is rated 8.6, while Trend Micro ServerProtect is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Endpoint writes "Makes it possible to see a threat once and block it across all endpoints and your entire security platform". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro ServerProtect writes "Ensures comprehensive protection, monitoring capabilities, and real-time insightful information". Cisco Secure Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon, Check Point Harmony Endpoint and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Trend Micro ServerProtect is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and SentinelOne Singularity Complete. See our Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Trend Micro ServerProtect 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.