Compare McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 15 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection writes "Enterprise endpoint security offerings are centrally managed and defend against the full threat spectrum from zero-day exploits to advanced targeted attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), Microsoft Windows Defender and Cylance, whereas Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike. See our McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,906 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
The solution is broken down into different components from the portals. Web filtering, which is an added feature has been great for us.When Intel acquired McAfee they worked on the protocol so that all vendors can work on the same platform. It's a very big improvement in McAfee. All McAfee products talk to each other. Other vendor's products can join this platform as well so it makes it more powerful on the enterprise side for McAfee.The initial setup is straightforward, not complex.The new central console is better than the earlier one.It has a very simple like multi-tenancy option and scalability is outstanding.McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is stable. We don't have any bugs being reported.The most valuable features are the adaptive tech on McAfee.Anyone can use it, the protection is good, and they have all of the features.

Read more »

The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week.It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core.We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.

Read more »

Cons
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.The initial setup is complex. It is a very complex product. You must have experience with it.The solution could use better updates and fewer bugs.Sometimes, while installing the ePO, we were getting so many errors and I don't know why it happened.Support-wise they need to be better.When it runs in the background of the endpoint, the devices get slowed down for some applications.McAfee Endpoint Protection could improve the word control feature.Its pricing needs to be improved.

Read more »

It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports.In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved.Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It's fairly priced compared to other products on the market.This product is costly.The pricing is comparable to other solutions on the market.No comment.

Read more »

The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
372,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
14,998
Comparisons
12,874
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
397
Avg. Rating
7.7
Views
18,485
Comparisons
13,155
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
797
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
McAfee Endpoint Protection, Total Protection for Endpoint, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, MCAFEE Complete Endpoint ProtectionCyvera
Learn
McAfee
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection allows you to protect all of your devices with intelligent, collaborative security, in one easy-to-manage, integrated solution. Our integrated endpoint security framework helps remove redundancies, enables fast, proven performance and offers an architecture to align both current and future security investments. With a flexible choice of cloud-based or a local management console, security administrators also get true centralized management that simplifies ongoing tasks, deployment and monitoring.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
inHouseIT, Seagate TechnologyCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Government18%
Financial Services Firm18%
Healthcare Company18%
Retailer12%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company32%
Comms Service Provider12%
Manufacturing Company11%
Financial Services Firm8%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company22%
Mining And Metals Company22%
Hospitality Company11%
Government11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company8%
Construction Company7%
Find out what your peers are saying about McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business 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.
Sign Up with Email