We performed a comparison between Fidelis Elevate 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."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"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 made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"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."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"If the network has seen something, we can use that to put a block to all the endpoints."
"The activation of features within ENS and the collection of threats into a single console is a strong point."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"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."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"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'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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"The solution can be expensive."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"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."
"The product could be flexible and offer better pricing."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Darktrace, 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 Fidelis Elevate vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.