We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare McAfee Active Response vs. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: October 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"I am really satisfied with the technical support.""It is a very stable program.""The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features.""It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device.""Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations.""Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us.""The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it.""One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pros »

"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based.""The solution is scalable."

More McAfee Active Response Pros »

Cons
"I would like more seamless integration.""The technical support is very slow.""I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products.""Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that.""The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.""We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment.""The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on.""The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Cons »

"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't.""While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."

More McAfee Active Response Cons »

"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."

More McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The price is very good.""The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost.""Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc.""In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement.""Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection.""There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization.""The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.""We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."

More Cisco Secure Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Our costs were somewhere around $600K in Trinidad dollars, which might be about $100K US. We have the ETP plus the EDR. Our recent renewal was 1800 licenses as opposed to the full amount. Our transaction cost was about $600K Trinidad dollars, which is somewhere around $90-100K US."

More McAfee Active Response Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection.
Top Answer: Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing.
Top Answer: The GUI needs improvement, it's not good. There are false positives in emails. At times, the emails are blocked and… more »
Top Answer: It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based.
Top Answer: We pay for the solution yearly. Our costs were somewhere around $600K in Trinidad dollars, which might be about $100K… more »
Top Answer: It's still not lightweight enough and not as light as they claim to be with the McAfee area of a next-gen AV. They can… more »
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
Learn More
Overview

Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

Continuous Visibility into Your Endpoints:
Capture and monitor events, files, host flows, process objects, context, and system state changes that may be indicators of attack or dormant attack components.

Identify and Remediate Breaches Faster:
Access tools you need to quickly correct security issues. Send intelligence to analytics, operations, and forensic teams.

Target Critical Threats:
Get preconfigured and customizable actions when triggered, so you can target and eliminate threats.

Endpoint detection and response (EDR) continuously monitor and gather data to provide the visibility and context needed to detect and respond to threats. ... McAfee® MVISION EDR helps to manage the high volume of alerts, empowering analysts of all skill levels to do more and investigate more effectively.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Secure Endpoint
Learn more about McAfee Active Response
Learn more about McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Liquor Control Board of Ontario
Sutherland Global Services
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company19%
Government13%
Manufacturing Company13%
University6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider24%
Computer Software Company23%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider20%
Financial Services Firm9%
Healthcare Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm11%
Government6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business36%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business27%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise52%
No Data Available
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: October 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.

McAfee Active Response is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 2 reviews while McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 1 review. McAfee Active Response is rated 6.0, while McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 3.0. The top reviewer of McAfee Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response writes "Resource-heavy, slow processing time, and bad technical support". McAfee Active Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro XDR, FireEye Endpoint Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks.

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.