We performed a comparison between McAfee MVISION Endpoint vs Trellix Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, Trellix Endpoint Security is the more popular choice because not only is deployment easy, but it has an appealing set of product features and seems to have more powerful detection capabilities than McAfee MVISION.
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"It has been protecting us for many years, and we hope it will continue to do so for many years to come."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features are the prevention layer that detects the signature value and prevents threats in the network."
"The solution scales well."
"McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is stable. We don't have any bugs being reported."
"The package of protection that it provides is useful. It has antivirus, malware protection, VPN, and a whole bunch of other features."
"Dynamic Application Containment."
"It has a feature called Isolation. If a device is compromised, we can connect it to our SOC, and no one would be able to access it. This way we can limit the damage to the network while we are investigating."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"The stability has been great."
"The independent modules are very good."
"Trellix Endpoint Security has a full suite of DLP."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"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."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"The support needs improvement."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The platform needs improvement in terms of handling heavy databases."
"Technical support from the vendor is very bad."
"The vendor should simplify the way they bundle the products because it's very hard to explain to customers what products contain which features."
"Signatures to protect against new attacks."
"The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming."
"The resolution time should be faster."
"The initial setup isn't so easy. You need to know what you are doing."
"The solution needs to offer better local technical support."
"In some cases, the detection part was not accurate enough. We opened a few cases for the vendor to help us with some miscategorized findings on the endpoints. There were some false positive detections, and we had to work with the vendor to get them tested. We even had some incidents that were not detected. It was a black box type of solution for us."
"One suggestion is they should reduce the constant notifications. Whenever I open my laptop, there are too many notifications from McAfee, and it gets annoying."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
"Malware detection can be better. It doesn't have support and detection for the recent malware, but it has a compensatory control where it can do the behavior-based assessment and alert you when there is something malicious or unexpected. For example, when a certain user is executing the privilege command, which is not normal. These dynamic detections are good, and they compensate for malware detection."
"Impacts performance of the servers quite negatively."
"The customization capabilities of the solution are an area where it lacks, so it would be great if our company could customize the solution to meet the demands of our customers."
"The performance could be better. I noticed that it slows down a bit."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 20 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 17th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 27 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "An informative dashboard and immediate reporting and notifications ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Great ePolicy orchestrator, seamlessly expands, and offers good reliability". Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cisco Secure Endpoint, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Open EDR. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (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.
It depends on what you want to achieve. With McAfee ENS you have complete coverage through McAfee solutions, that is, it has an AV engine (threat Protection), you have Advance Threat Protection (ATP), light control over browsers, and a firewall.
With MVISION Endpoint you add being able to manage Microsoft Defender from the MVISION ePO or EPO on-premise console. But the AV engine is Defender, not McAfee. So you depend on the potential and configuration you make of Defender.