We performed a comparison between ESET Inspect and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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."The setup is pretty simple."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"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."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers endpoint protection and helps collect information while also allowing users to investigate malicious files in an IT environment...It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to isolate or quarantine devices and block or detect Ransomware and other well-known tools that are used to exploit vulnerabilities on devices."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The solution is not stable."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"The platform's price could be better."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
ESET Inspect is ranked 51st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 6 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews. ESET Inspect is rated 7.6, while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of ESET Inspect writes "A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Multifeatured, with web control, advanced threat protection, and threat prevention capabilities, but its alerting and reporting features need improvement". ESET Inspect is most compared with HP Wolf Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our ESET Inspect vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) report.
See our list of 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.
