We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus and Trend Vision One 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."It is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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."
"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."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The best thing about Bitdefender is that it has got top-notch features and it is not tied to specific countries like some other antivirus tools."
"It never fails. Bitdefender always catches all of the viruses that have been detected on customer sites."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus is highly stable."
"I find Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus to be a pretty good solution for the mid-level market, specifically for organizations with up to two hundred fifty users. I like that it is an averagely priced solution. It also has a straightforward installation that can be completed within three to five minutes. Its technical support is also good enough."
"They were one of the companies, early on, that spent a lot of time integrating their toolsets, and I was really impressed with that... the endpoint management system could reach out to the Deep Discovery system on the network and pick up something that it perceived as a suspicious object."
"The setup is fairly simple."
"The zero-day vulnerability is valuable."
"XDR provided a much more deep view into what is actually happening."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Its detection rate is valuable. It is really an easy product to install and manage. It is quite effective at what it does, and if needed, it can also be co-managed, which means 24 hours and seven days a week monitoring through a SOC."
"The proactive approach is the best feature."
"VisionOne offers a clear window into the security posture of our endpoints."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The solution is not stable."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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."
"The mobile version needs improvement."
"The solution seems to be pretty amateur for an EDR solution, and it should be more in sync in terms of features, with solutions such as FireEye and SentinelOne."
"Adding a feature like Data Loss Prevention would be beneficial."
"While blocking an IP address restricts access for 30 days, it eventually becomes accessible again."
"We do use the automation capability a little. However, we noticed some limitations, especially on the playbook side."
"I would like to have the capability to export the information we receive from the XDR into Microsoft Excel."
"The price could be lower."
"I would like to have more integration with mobile device management."
"It would be ideal if they could improve the control of connectivity between sensors."
"The solution lacks compatibility with other products. It needs to integrate better with other surrounding solutions."
"The information captured by Trend Vision One needs to be more detailed."
More Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus Pricing and Cost Advice →
Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus is ranked 50th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 4 reviews while Trend Vision One is ranked 5th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 42 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus is rated 7.6, while Trend Vision One is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus writes "Averagely priced, has a straightforward installation, and worth recommending to the mid-level market, but its performance needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Vision One writes "The integration of toolsets is key, enabling automation, and vendor has been tremendous partner for us". Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus is most compared with HP Wolf Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR and Darktrace, whereas Trend Vision One is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender XDR, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus vs. Trend Vision One 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.