We performed a comparison between HP Wolf Security and Trellix Endpoint Security 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."This is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
"Now, instead of us having to go through that analysis, they actually give us a monthly report that shows us: "Here's what you got hit with, here's what would have happened, here are the forensics behind the attack," and, obviously, Bromium stopped it."
"I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments."
"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"Trellix Security Endpoint can promptly isolate any host machines directly from the console. If alerts are received and isolation is necessary, it can be accomplished through the console. The console itself holds significant value, accessible through a browser and allowing remote actions via cloud login."
"The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP)."
"Dynamic Application Containment."
"I have found many of the features to be useful."
"The reporting capabilities are a valuable feature. In enables more visibility on our network."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
"It has been protecting us for many years, and we hope it will continue to do so for many years to come."
"The new central console is better than the earlier one."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Detections could be improved."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I did not find this to be an out-of-the-box solution, it required planning and alignment across many groups."
"They have always struggled with usability. The protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer. It's gotten a lot better now with Win 10. But sometimes, when you open up a website, it's going to take longer than it would without Bromium, and it's the same with documents."
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability. It works well with attacks, but it doesn't work well with all software on the clients. There is a lot of troubleshooting and a lot of things that need to be tuned to make it work and not break things."
"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"
"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms. There are a lot of updates that come out for Microsoft Windows operating systems and the Bromium product needs to be able to keep up quickly with those updates and all the browser updates that are coming out. It's hard to do, but that's really where they need to be more responsive because we end up with problems and then we have to call support to get patches, etc."
"The tool behaves differently when I ported to Windows 11."
"When you deploy, not only is the user asked to reboot their computer, they are also asked to wait for 20 minutes while it sits there and initializes. It definitely impacts the end-user. It takes time away from their day."
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"I think it would be nice if Dynamic Application Control would come together with McAfee Endpoint Security."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"The solution's documentation is not streamlined and is in bits and pieces, which should be in a single format."
"We would like to see all the features available on cloud."
"The price of the solution is high in Asia."
"It can be quite complicated to learn McAfee Endpoint Security and to feel comfortable with the environment."
"The solution's technical support should be improved since we faced a lot of issues with the support. There were some delays in responses from the technical support."
"Its pricing needs to be improved."
HP Wolf Security is ranked 49th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 8 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. HP Wolf Security is rated 7.8, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HP Wolf Security writes "Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". HP Wolf Security is most compared with Norton Small Business, Bitdefender Total Security, Microsoft Defender for Business, Kaspersky Total Security and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas 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. See our HP Wolf Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security 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.