We performed a comparison between Intercept X Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Intercept X Endpoint combines two products into one solution, offering strong performance, server protection, and efficient threat management capabilities. Trellix Endpoint Security is highly valued for its easy administration options and reliability. Intercept X Endpoint could benefit from better integration with third-party vendors and improved support for virtual infrastructures. Reviews suggest that Trellix could reduce resource consumption and improve user-friendliness.
Service and Support: Some users found Intercept X Endpoint's support team knowledgeable and supportive, while others expressed dissatisfaction with responsiveness. Some users have found the support for Trellix Endpoint Security helpful and reliable, while others have encountered ineffective assistance and communication problems.
Ease of Deployment: Intercept X Endpoint has a straightforward initial setup, with quick installation and simple configuration and maintenance. Some users said they occasionally encountered issues that required reinstallation. The setup process for Trellix Endpoint Security varies in difficulty, depending on the user's experience with McAfee and general technical expertise.
Pricing: Intercept X Endpoint is generally seen as fairly priced, but some users think it’s on the higher end of the price scale. Some find Trellix’s price reasonable and competitive, while others believe it could be lowered.
ROI: Users say that Intercept X Endpoint offers exceptional defense against ransomware and zero-day threats, leading to a positive return on investment. Trellix Endpoint Security provides significant time savings.
"I like how Microsoft XDR and the other Microsoft products are integrated into a single unified security stack covering identity access management, endpoint protection, email, cloud applications, etc."
"Advanced hunting is good. I like that. We can drill down to lots of details."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"The 'Incidents and Alerts' tab is a valuable feature where we can find triggered alerts."
"The advantage of Microsoft Defender XDR has over other XDRs in the market is that it's easy to use. You can quickly differentiate between alerts, incidents, devices, software, etc. It's easier to investigate an incident, and you have so many options. You can automate investigations and use playbooks. There's also the live response session, which is something you can't find in any other XDR."
"It provides a single pane of glass within the 365 admin interface, streamlining our experience by consolidating information in one place and eliminating the need to navigate through multiple interfaces."
"The most valuable feature is the network security."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the behavioral, non-signature-based threat detection."
"The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing."
"It is an intelligent tool."
"The key factor that attracted me to Sophos Intercept X was the multi-platform. I have multiple clients that have mixed environments of Mac and Windows. I am able to deliver a standard solution, regardless of the platform."
"The most valuable feature is that it literally works. We have reduced a lot of complaints after switching to Sophos."
"There do not seem to be any limitations to the scalability of this product."
"The performance is good."
"Malware protection and application blocking are absolutely great. The DLP and malware features are very helpful. It is also very user-friendly, reliable, and scalable. It is easy to set up. We are also happy with its price and support."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."
"The package of protection that it provides is useful. It has antivirus, malware protection, VPN, and a whole bunch of other features."
"The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP)."
"It has been protecting us for many years, and we hope it will continue to do so for many years to come."
"Some of McAfee Endpoint Security's main features are it has benefits over normal conventional antivirus solutions because it works much faster."
"The initial setup is straightforward, not complex."
"One valuable feature is Threat Prevention with the on-demand scan."
"The solution is broken down into different components from the portals. Web filtering, which is an added feature has been great for us."
"The user interface of Microsoft 365 Defender could improve. They could make it simpler."
"Microsoft frequently changes the names of its products, sometimes even renaming entire portals or features."
"While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience."
"Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded."
"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."
"What could be improved in Microsoft 365 Defender is its licensing, e.g. it should be more consolidated and would be good if it has some optimizations. Improving the alerts and notifications, in terms of adding more details, would also be good for this solution."
"Customers say they want absolutely seamless integration between other Microsoft solutions and Defender XDR, including the ability to change device settings within the Defender portal. They need to contact the IT team responsible for the device management tools to change some settings. They would prefer that those changes be initiated directly from the Defender portal or applied from Intune without involving the IT operations team."
"The support team is not competent or responsive."
"We would like to deploy across a variety of machines simultaneously through the network."
"They should work on the logs and events. Sophos Intercept X needs to increase the interface test so that it can export to a live event."
"When there is an event generated by either the firewall or Intercept X, and the originating IP address is the same, these should be merged into a single event rather than two."
"The initial setup can be a bit challenging."
"If we can lower the price, it will be fantastic because it will generate more revenue for us."
"I would like the solution to have more functions and to be more user-friendly."
"They need to focus on their SLA or technical support. They also need to focus on their UI. They should also improve their content filtering tool and update it so that correct categories are there. Sometimes, when I want to block an online gaming website, it is not shown under the correct category. It is shown under another category. They need to review their content filtering tool on a bi-weekly or monthly basis and update the sites and categories. This will be really helpful for them."
"It would be beneficial if you could expand support for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 without charging an additional fee."
"The solution needs to offer better local technical support."
"The initial setup is complex. It is a very complex product. You must have experience with it."
"It can be quite complicated to learn McAfee Endpoint Security and to feel comfortable with the environment."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
"There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging."
"It didn't work well for some of the use cases. We have different use cases for each entity. Their support is also not good and needs improvement."
"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections."
Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 101 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient, 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 Intercept X Endpoint 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.