We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and NetWitness XDR based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Trellix Endpoint Security users like the ePolicy Orchestrator, the solution’s robust central management console. NetWitness XDR is commended for its prompt threat response, seamless integration capabilities, and user behavior analytics. Trellix could improve by reducing resource usage, enhancing stability, and making the solution more user-friendly. Users say NetWitness XDR could improve its threat intelligence and investigation. Some suggested updates to its reporting engine.
Service and Support: Some users say Trellix support is helpful and responsive, while others believe there is room for improvement in communication and resolution times. NetWitness XDR provides effective 24/7 technical support. While some were satisfied with the response times, others experienced delays of up to 48 hours.
Ease of Deployment: Setting up Trellix Endpoint Security is simple if the user has some expertise. Some users found the initial setup of NetWitness uncomplicated, but others faced challenges.
Pricing: Trellix Endpoint Security’s pricing is considered flexible, competitive, and about average compared to other solutions. The total cost of NetWitness XDR depends on the environment and the number of endpoints. Larger users can receive discounts, but users say the solution might be too pricey for smaller companies. NetWitness XDR provides various licenses, including some that feature premium support.
ROI: Users reported saving time by implementing Trellix Endpoint Security. NetWitness XDR has demonstrated positive outcomes by improving threat detection capabilities and facilitating digital forensics.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Trellix Endpoint Security over NetWitness XDR. Users praised Trellix's extensive management capabilities, low resource usage, and reasonable price. NetWitness XDR receives mixed reviews for its slower performance, and complex licensing. Users also that NetWitness could improve its threat intelligence and user interface. Trellix Endpoint Security earned positive feedback for its customer service and support, while some NetWitness users were unsatisfied with response times.
"I like that it's stable. It's been stable for a long time, and Microsoft Defender has done a good job there."
"Among the most valuable features are the alert timeline, the alert story, which is pretty detailed. It gives us complete insight into what exactly happened on the endpoint. It doesn't just say, "Malware detected." It tells us what caused that malware to be detected and how it was detected. It gives us a complete timeline from beginning to end."
"It gives a lot of flexibility in terms of configuration and customization as per the business requirements."
"It has great stability."
"The integration between all the Defender products is the most valuable feature."
"The EDR features are valuable. By getting the EDR features, we have more control over the device. We have information about events in real-time and more protection against zero-day threats and zero-day vulnerabilities. We can monitor every event or action that a device is going through. We can get an idea if it is something malicious or if we have to take any actions."
"The product integrates security into one tool instead of having third-party security tools."
"The best feature is threat hunting. There are a lot of other features I like, such as the alert mechanism. The chain alert mechanism has a huge impact. It combines all the alerts into one incident and automatically correlates them with AI."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Network is the single unified dashboard from which you can manage all the different products of RSA. Additionally, the integration with native applications is good."
"They have recently updated the features and the most valuable ones are the instant threat response, ease of use, web interface, integration, and easy access. RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very compatible with other solutions and technologies. However, they do not rely on third-party solutions and have most features built-in."
"RSA NetWitness does market analysis in a more granular form. It gives you full visibility."
"Technical support is knowledgeable."
"It helps our security team respond more accurately when there are threats, then we get less false positives or negatives."
"The log correlation is good."
"It is very easy to use, and its usability is great. The use cases are also very easy. The visualizations of the use cases are magnificent. You cannot find this in any other solution. From my point of view, it is great."
"NetWitness Endpoint's most valuable features are its interoperability across many different operating systems and the ease of pivoting from network to endpoint via a single console."
"The most valuable features are the prevention layer that detects the signature value and prevents threats in the network."
"Initially, the DLP was very valuable for disabling access to USB drives."
"It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts."
"The product helps us by contacting us if there are any virus attacks on our system."
"The loss prevention feature would be the most valuable."
"It's quite easy to install agents."
"The performance is good."
"A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us. McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field."
"Support is hit or miss. Microsoft wants you to buy premium support contracts. Though they call themselves professional support, it's almost like throwing questions into a black hole. You get an answer, but it's never helpful."
"Microsoft frequently changes the names of its products, sometimes even renaming entire portals or features."
"I'd like to see a wider solution that includes not only desktop devices but also other devices, such as servers, storage cabinets, switching equipment, et cetera."
"When we do investigations, it would be better if Microsoft could populate the host dashboard more. When we open any host for investigation, we want the entire timeline of what is happening on the host, including all the users logging in, their hardware, Windows version, etc."
"The interface could be improved. For example, if you want to do a phishing simulation for your employees, it can take a while to figure out what to do. The interface is a bit messy and could be updated. It isn't too bad, but doing some things can be a long process."
"There could be a way to proactively monitor unusual activity ."
"Automated playbooks and automated dashboards would be preferable to the way the data is currently being presented."
"The mobile app support for Android and iOS is difficult and needs improvement."
"Its price could be improved. It is an expensive product. Its training is also too expensive. It would be great if they can have a better pricing scheme for the training."
"The contamination feature could be improved."
"NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious."
"When analyzing something, you have to click several times. It requires a lot of effort to find something."
"The integration of the solution needs to be improved. The dashboard needs lots of updates as well. In the next release, we would like to see advanced fraud detection features."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"The deployment process is complex. I don't know why, but this solution will suddenly stop working. Logs stop coming. Often, one thing or another stops working. Most of the time, one of my team members is working with troubleshooting and working with technical support. Log passing is also one of the biggest challenge."
"I would like to see Security Orchestration and Response Automation (SOAR) integration."
"The solution should provide a more easy way to uninstall it on specific stations."
"With McAfee, if there is a zero-day vulnerability, you have to download the patch for it from the McAfee website, then apply it to your endpoint."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"The initial setup is complex. It is a very complex product. You must have experience with it."
"We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement. MacAfee's better than the ancient anti-virus solutions but it's a little slow to resolve. Many files with malware were destroyed through the network, and MacAfee doesn't detect anything."
"We would like to see all the features available on cloud."
"Trying to move away from the signature model for antivirus and malware blocking is something that would be nice. Instead of having to update every day, which is signature-based, moving to more of a kernel or architecture-based model would probably be beneficial."
"The endpoint has room for improvement because it's restrictive, it's very sensitive. Sometimes it can delete something that you need and so sometimes you have to disable the antivirus."
NetWitness XDR is ranked 40th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 15 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. NetWitness XDR is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of NetWitness XDR writes "Beneficial single unified dashboard, good native application integration, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". NetWitness XDR is most compared with Darktrace, ExtraHop Reveal(x), CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete 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 Trend Micro Deep Security. See our NetWitness XDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
