We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Trellix Endpoint Security is highly valued for its easy administration options and reliability. Reviews suggest that Trellix could reduce resource consumption and improve user-friendliness. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks presents an intuitive interface, advanced identification of risks, expandability, and compatibility with various other solutions. However, Cortex XDR could use enhancements in hard disk encryption, security integration, and customer education.
Service and Support: Some users have found the support for Trellix Endpoint Security helpful and reliable, while others have encountered ineffective assistance and communication problems. Some customers were impressed with Palo Alto support, while others reported mixed experiences.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Trellix Endpoint Security varies in difficulty, depending on the user's experience with McAfee and general technical expertise. Some users thought Cortex XDR’s deployment was fast and straightforward, while others consider it to be a complex and time-consuming task that requires thorough planning.
Pricing: Some find Trellix’s price reasonable and competitive, while others believe it could be lowered. Some reviewers said Cortex XDR is expensive, but others said it was reasonable for the robust feature set Cortex offers.
ROI: Trellix Endpoint Security provides significant time savings. Cortex XDR creates value by ensuring system and data security rather than a financial return on investment.
Comparison Results: Trellix Endpoint Security is preferred over Cortex XDR. Users said Trellix's comprehensive management capabilities enable effortless administration of all programs from a single console. Cortex XDR received mixed reviews for its initial setup, customer service, and pricing.
"I like 365 Defender's advanced threat hunting. The dashboard is user-friendly with templates for site policies, etc. The most important use case is evaluating the risk links and applications."
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"The comprehensiveness of Microsoft's threat detection is good."
"The most valuable features are spam filtering, attachment filtering, and antivirus protection."
"Within advanced threat hunting, the tables that have already been defined by Microsoft are helpful. In the advanced threat hunting tab, there were different tables, and one of the tables was related to device info, device alert, and device events. That was very helpful. Another feature that I liked but didn't have access to was deep analysis."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"The timeline feature is excellent. I also like the phishing simulation. We have phishing campaigns to educate employees and warn them about these threats."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"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 collects and caches and the knowledge of machine learning from different customers to take to the cloud. It makes it better to use for everybody. It allows for quick learning and updates and can, therefore, offer zero-day malware security. This sharing of metadata helps make the solution very safe."
"Cortex covers everything I need. It's a perfect solution. Cortex provides a different level of visibility because it's an extended EDR, allowing you to grab logs from the network and firewalls. Palo Alto invented the concept of the extended EDR or XDR."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"Automatic user recovery prior to Windows booting up."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use."
"Technical support is always available and very helpful."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"There is a new feature where you can set thresholds for all the CPU consumption allowing for no consumption on the servers when the scans happen. It is a separate plugin or addon, and if we have it on all the virtual machines it automatically checks the resources, and based on that, it will schedule the scans. That is something that I have not seen in other antivirus solutions, such as Symantec."
"The initial setup of Trellix Endpoint Security was straightforward."
"It is a stable solution...The solution's technical support is good."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"The solution does not offer a unified response and standard data."
"Generally, antivirus products provide a central control to manage every device in terms of who is installing it or who is trying to disable it, but Microsoft doesn't have such a control center for the antivirus product it provides."
"Correctly updated records are the most significant area for improvement. There have been times when we were notified of a required fix; we would carry out the fix and confirm it but still get the same notification a week later. This seems to be a delay in records being updated and leads to false reporting, which is something that needs to be fixed."
"The support from Microsoft could improve. There are times I have to wait for a response from a qualified specialist."
"I'd like to see a wider solution that includes not only desktop devices but also other devices, such as servers, storage cabinets, switching equipment, et cetera."
"Microsoft 365 Defender does not have a unique package with emerging endpoint security technologies, such as EDR and XDR."
"The documentation on their website is somewhat outdated and doesn't show properly. I wanted to try a query in Microsoft Defender 365. When I opened the related documentation from the security blog on the Microsoft website, the figures were not showing. It was difficult to understand the article without having the figures. The figures were there in the article, but they were not getting loaded, which made the article obsolete."
"I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling."
"The DAC (Dynamic Application Containment) component of this product needs improvement."
"There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"It would be a lot easier if I could add multiple user accounts within a single device."
"The product is not easy to use."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"The security of this solution needs improvement."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "It provides a whole new level of visibility and integrates with most other vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.