Compare Bitdefender GravityZone vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

Bitdefender GravityZone is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 13 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone writes "Easy to use, easy installation and can be installed on other servers or workstations". 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". Bitdefender GravityZone is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), Kaspersky Endpoint Security and ESET Endpoint Security, whereas Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike. See our Bitdefender GravityZone vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender GravityZone vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
377,264 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 cloud management is easy and useful, especially in our case when we have multiple offices in different locations.The features that are most useful are the simplicity of deploying the package and the cryptosystem for managing all the situations on the computer.I like that you can manage all the time and you can uninstall and install everything via the web console.GravityZone can be controlled from the cloud.I have access to it from anywhere.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.They are constantly updating the solution against malware.One of the most valuable features is the signature updating in near real-time.

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
They were working on the encryption management for laptops, and if they complete it then it would be helpful.The cryptosystem could be improved a bit.The outreach from support was a bit bad according to their plan, but we've got two people here that manage and support GravityZone and interact with them and they manage it very well.We find it's making the machines run slow.The solution wasn't designed to be used in France.The pricing should be improved. The user interface has been improved on a yearly basis. The key issue is that they need to look at their pricing.I would like to see a remote desktop for installed endpoints so administrators can see what is on a user's screen or what a user is doing.What's happening now in this field is artificial intelligence, the behavior part. That is now the trend in many products, including Bitdefender, and this is where the product needs improvement.

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
There is a fully functional trial that we used and we didn't have any issues.It has a suitable price for every company and organization.Licensing is done on a yearly basis and it's workstation-based.The price is per license per endpoint. The price is different for everyone, but we find the price is cheap for us.

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.
377,264 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
11,068
Comparisons
8,995
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
594
Avg. Rating
8.5
Views
18,374
Comparisons
13,039
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
799
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
Cyvera
Learn
Bitdefender
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

Bitdefender GravityZone's ENDPOINT SECURITY TOOLS intelligent security agent assesses the host machine at installation to self-configure to optimal form, and adapts its behavior according to endpoint accessibility. Security administrators allocate resources to security tasks through policies per groups of machines. They can set security tools to work on a local machine, or they can decide to rely more on Bitdefender Global Protective Network, or totally offload security to security servers.

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 Bitdefender GravityZone
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
Mentor Graphics, Rudersdal KommuneCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company21%
Comms Service Provider19%
Media Company14%
Financial Services Firm10%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company22%
Mining And Metals Company22%
Media Company11%
Hospitality Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company7%
Construction Company7%
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender GravityZone vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
377,264 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