We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The stability is very good."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers endpoint protection and helps collect information while also allowing users to investigate malicious files in an IT environment...It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"This is a stable product."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front."
"The performance is good."
"FireEye Endpoint Security is easy to use and lightweight compared to others."
"The solution is not stable."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The technical support must be improved."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"The graphical view for nodes must be increased."
"An area for improvement in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the historical search. For example: when you have information on the artifact and a precedent, you want to do a search, and that is a bit lacking in the tool."
"The CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"Search feature could be made more user-friendly."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"The way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 48 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) writes "Multifeatured, with web control, advanced threat protection, and threat prevention capabilities, but its alerting and reporting features need improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "It integrates well with other solutions, but the vendor needs more of a local presence and faster response". Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Trend Vision One, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR and SentinelOne Singularity Complete. See our Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
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.