We performed a comparison between Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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."
"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 product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"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."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"I like the simplicity of this solution and the fact that it saves us time. The deployment was really straightforward and useful and I am impressed by the anti-virus endpoint detection and response offered by this solution."
"The endpoint protection is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The solution has exchange protection. It has a content control, device control, a firewall, and anti-malware as well. They are all quite valuable features for us."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Trellix integrates well with most SIEM and data classification solutions."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"The independent modules are very good."
"The extendability is great."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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."
"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 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."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The database needs improvement. It needs to be updated quite a bit."
"There needs to be better integration with the environment. Especially, for the active directory and also for keeping up with the changes from Microsoft. We use a lot of Microsoft OS. I have noted that sometimes they lag behind Microsoft updates. For example, when with Windows 10. I had some issues with deploying to Windows 10 because the solution was behind in updating their own services to match the Microsoft release."
"There are blurred lines between anti-virus and endpoint detection so I would say it can be confusing when you are considering buying this program. I would like to see that being explained better to the customer."
"The product needs to reduce the usage of RAM and CPU."
"The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing. The price should be improved, it's high."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
"It is a very heavy tool, unfortunately."
"The solution can be expensive."
"I would like to see simple processing and reporting online."
More Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is ranked 60th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 48 reviews. Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is rated 7.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection writes "An excellent endpoint protection that's scalable and reasonably priced". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is most compared with Advanced SystemCare Ultimate, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, 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 list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.