We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"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 most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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."
"I have found many of the features to be useful."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
"I feel McAfee Endpoint Security to be a good, mature product."
"The product’s stability and security features enhance user protection and organizational security."
"It has been protecting us for many years, and we hope it will continue to do so for many years to come."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"Trellix Endpoint Security's dashboard is very flexible, and I can create my own user-specific dashboard depending on user privilege or preference."
"I think the costing is fine compared to other products. Cost-wise you definitely get value for your money."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"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."
"Detections could be improved."
"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."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution needs to offer better local technical support."
"The security of this solution needs improvement."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"The price of the solution is high in Asia."
"We don't like the solution since it requires much memory consumption and consumes much CPU resources."
"The endpoint has room for improvement because it's restrictive, it's very sensitive. Sometimes it can delete something that you need and so sometimes you have to disable the antivirus."
"On the next release, they should build an easier way to see a repair option within the McAfee icon on your system tray. If there was an issue, you should be able to contact the user or just right-click on "repair". That would be a very good feature to add. That could be a place of improvement, just adding that button, or customizing it."
"Recently, Trellix has introduced a CDR, which involves more manual response than automatic. I believe they should enhance the system by adding features like automated response and the ability to create custom playbooks. This is crucial for an EDR solution, and currently, Trellix lacks this feature while other products offer it."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". 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, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
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.