We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Trellix Network Detection and Response 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."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"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"
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's fast and safe."
"The initial setup is easy. Our clients use the FortiClient EMS, which is the central console for installing FortiClient. It is easy and very user friendly."
"I use the tool to connect server to an ISP Data Center."
"It supports securely connections for VPN users from outside our environment during the lockdown."
"From an application perspective, this solution is stable."
"It is not at all interesting for me as a standalone product, but as a product that is integrated with FortiGate with all features, it is actually a great tool and a great experience. I had test installed FortiClient working from home. I remembered and knew which web categories were denied or allowed. All those policies were correctly reflected standalone, for example, on my laptop."
"The integration of the vulnerability scan, mobile detection, and VPN client."
"What I like most about FortiClient is that it's easy to use. The way it displays information is very straightforward."
"The features that I find most valuable are the MIR (Mandiant Incident Response) for checks on our inbound security."
"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."
"The MVX Engine seems to be very capable against threats and the way it handles APTs is impressive."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how it allows users to do the investigation part. Another important part of the product that is valuable is associated with how it gives information to users in the form of a storyline."
"Very functional and good for detecting malicious traffic."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"We see ROI in the sense that we don't have to react because it stops anything from hurting the network. We can stop it before we have a bigger mess to clean up."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"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 only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"The support needs improvement."
"I haven't found that that solution does anything amazing."
"The only thing that is lacking in this product is the support. Their support can be improved."
"The solution has some issues with stability on the user side."
"The deployment status is not good in Mac devices and sometimes in Windows-based devices using GPO, like Active Directory, that are not on the local network."
"It has a horrible performance. It is one of the most unstable VPNs I have ever used."
"There is room for improvement by increasing the solution's knowledge base."
"The features of Fortinet FortiClient could be improved."
"The features for application control and device control must be improved."
"As far as future inclusions, it would be useful to display more threat intelligence, such as the actual area of the threat and the origin of the web crawling (Tor and Dark Web)."
"Cybersecurity posture has room for improvement."
"Technical packaging could be improved."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"Certain features in Trellix Network Detection and Response, such as using AL-type commands, may initially pose a challenge for those unfamiliar with such commands. However, once users become accustomed to the system, it becomes easier to use."
"We'd like the potential for better scaling."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
More Trellix Network Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews while Trellix Network Detection and Response is ranked 9th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 37 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Trellix Network Detection and Response is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Network Detection and Response writes "Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas Trellix Network Detection and Response is most compared with Fortinet FortiSandbox, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Zscaler Internet Access, Fortinet FortiGate and Vectra AI. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.
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.