Compare BigFix vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

BigFix is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Protection for Business with 34 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "The most complete and flexible endpoint solution on the market". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". BigFix is most compared with SCCM, Ansible and Tanium, whereas Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike. See our BigFix vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BigFix Logo
27,396 views|15,315 comparisons
Palo Alto Networks Traps Logo
18,374 views|13,039 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about BigFix vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,950 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The older version of the tools that I use also included the connectivity aspect, and the fact that the tool now has it separate from the collection of usage data makes the deployment of these tools much easier.One of the biggest benefits BigFix has had for our organization is the ease and efficiency to perform many different tasks, across pillars and platforms, all from one pane of glass.The most valuable feature is patch management, a must have, even for Linux and iOS.It's enabled us to have a highly successful endpoint patching program for the past decade. It's been enormously successful there. It's also become a core part of many of our business processes, from compliance monitoring of endpoints, encryption management, key escrow, and local administrator password escrow. It's built into our inventory. It's very much everywhere.Servers are patched more consistently than they have been previously.Being able to intelligently create reports, gather data, export CSVs and give that to the leadership of some of the client groups that my team supports has helped my organization.We are able to use BigFix through API connections to automate and reduce resources and time. The product's been great for us. It's increased the security posture ten-fold and it's increased our visibility across our endpoints enormously.BigFix has drastically reduced the maintenance window period to patch and reboot servers.

Read more »

The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week.It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core.We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.

Read more »

Cons
I self-taught for this online, so the initial setup was a little difficult to pick up at first. I had to create a couple of testing environments and destroy them in order to learn how to use it. There was a lot of trial and error, a lot of reading of the manuals.I would like to see SDK for Web UI included in the next release.I would like to see the Self Service section made more user-friendly.Around the scalability concern, I would like to see the ability to run teamed, clustered, or hierarchical root servers, in order to provide a more robust, high availability system. The single monolithic root server model does somewhat bother me.I would like to see the integration of user security between the different products to be improved. There's separate security for compliance, separate security for web reports, and the console, and you have to manage those things separately.The stability is generally pretty good. The one thing that we came across is the battle between load on endpoints and load on our servers and relays versus how quickly, effectively and reliably actions can be taken. I'd like to not have to take an action on a system while I'm working with someone and then have to say whether something will happen between five seconds or thirty minutes from that point.I would like to see API connectivity, built-in API connectors to the standard toolsets, whether it's for your ServiceNow or your Qualys. More API connectivity to make it easier to integrate to other tools.I would like to see a web UI SDK so we could take what is provided currently and be able to build our own customized web UI for particular customers that want to sell service.

Read more »

It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports.In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved.Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Compliance, inventory, and licensing are really pricey. They should lower the price. It discourages users from getting onboard.The product is less costly when compared to other solutions, and this is a good solid solution for what we have paid.

Read more »

The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
378,950 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
27,396
Comparisons
15,315
Reviews
36
Average Words per Review
548
Avg. Rating
8.4
Views
18,374
Comparisons
13,039
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
799
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 44% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Also Known As
Tivoli Endpoint ManagerCyvera
Learn
HCL
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

IBM BigFix provides complete visibility and control into all endpoints through a single, unified platform. Enterprises can now bridge the bridge the gap between threat detection and response, drastically reducing remediation times and costs by consolidating best-in-class EDR, enterprise asset discovery, endpoint interrogation, rich threat intelligence, multi-platform patch management (90+ OS) and software distribution. Security and operations teams can see, understand and act on all endpoint threats while proactively reducing the attack surface. • SEE: Discover and audit every endpoint, on or off the corporate network—and rapidly detect evasive attacks using behavioral analytics that understand how attackers compromise your endpoints. • UNDERSTAND: Guided investigation enables security analysts to understand the full context and scope of an attack based on real-time endpoint information, not just historical data. • ACT: Respond with purpose. BigFix provides the capability to deliver targeted remediation—not only on patient zero but enterprise-wide—in minutes or hours.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about BigFix
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
US Foods, Penn State, St Vincent's Health US Foods, Sabadell Bank, SunTrust, Australia Sydney, Stemac, Capgemini, WNS Global Services, Jebsen & Jessen, CenterBeam, Strauss, Christian Hospital Centre, Brit Insurance, Career Education CorporationCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
University20%
Retailer17%
Healthcare Company17%
Wireless Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company34%
Comms Service Provider7%
Financial Services Firm6%
Government6%
REVIEWERS
Mining And Metals Company22%
Healthcare Company22%
Financial Services Firm11%
Retailer11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company7%
Construction Company7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise73%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise84%
REVIEWERS
Small Business40%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise40%
Find out what your peers are saying about BigFix vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,950 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business 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.
Sign Up with Email