We performed a comparison between Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Trellix Endpoint Security 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."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The cloud management is easy and useful, especially in our case when we have multiple offices in different locations."
"We like the dashboard, the console, the reporting. It's very easy to deploy."
"I like GravityZone's short implementation time. It takes only a day, at most."
"I like that you can manage all the time and you can uninstall and install everything via the web console."
"It is a good anti-malware product that is highly stable."
"Bitdefender GravityZone EDR's installation is straightforward."
"We have clients who are also migrating from other anti-virus solutions to GravityZone because of the ease of use, ease of installation and the fact that it can be deployed in the cloud and the same software; you can actually install on other server or workstation. It automatically knows what it's protecting."
"One strong point is that it doesn't have many background services running on the Windows system or server operating system. This minimizes impact because it's a lighter version."
"The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use."
"The thing that I like is that they have gathered almost all the products in one management server, the ePolicy Orchestrator."
"I like trap prevention DNS and threat prevention."
"Anyone can use it, the protection is good, and they have all of the features."
"A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us. McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
"Would benefit with the addition of DLP features."
"The solution includes a good combination of features for both signature and signature-less."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The support needs improvement."
"The reporting is much too simple."
"Bitfender could improve their modules on the server. For example, Bitdefender doesn't have content filters or firewall modules on the server. It would be great if it had a networking module and a content filter module at the workstations."
"The software itself is solid. It would be better if it was more of a real-time solution, like SentinelOne. The one thing that holds me back on the SentinelOne side is that I can blacklist websites and stuff like that, but it's not as granular as Bitdefender. With Bitdefender, I feel like I have more control over what I can whitelist and blacklist."
"There was a bit of a problem deploying."
"I have not had used the EDR portion of the solution to do any custom scripting to allow further advanced operations on the endpoints. From what I understand from reading the comments on reviews is that it is not particularly flexible in this regard."
"What would make Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra better is if Bitdefender employed more firewall policies and added even more features to the product."
"Their ransomware remediation doesn't respond as fast as BullWall does...Ransomware control needs to be improved."
"The cryptosystem could be improved a bit."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"The resolution time should be faster."
"The product is not easy to use."
"Although they have increased the complexity, it has affected the scanning speed."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"The platform needs improvement in terms of handling heavy databases."
"Sometimes, while installing the ePO, we were getting so many errors and I don't know why it happened."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is ranked 15th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 54 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is rated 8.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone EDR writes "High-quality threat intelligence, including encryption and mobile device protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Bitdefender GravityZone EDR is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon, Intercept X Endpoint and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our Bitdefender GravityZone EDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
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.