We performed a comparison between Fidelis Elevate and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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 solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The stability is very good."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"The platform’s most valuable features are ease of use, integration, and deployment."
"The most valuable network security feature is the network sandbox solution. This sandbox feature works on traffic flow."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"A great console with a user-friendly GUI."
"It's good that it periodically scans all my drives. I can stay up to date with the status of my drivers and update them if needed."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The solution is not stable."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"Performance is a problematic area in the solution needing improvement."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"Search feature could be made more user-friendly."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve by an overall simplification of the solution."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews. Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". 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". Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace 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 Fidelis Elevate vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors and 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.