We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Security and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It's easy to use."
"One valuable feature is Threat Prevention with the on-demand scan."
"The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP)."
"The product’s stability and security features enhance user protection and organizational security."
"Their malware detection rate is excellent for all type of devices and the anti-theft products are good and easy to use."
"It's easy to use and it's very powerful. It offers nice endpoint protection."
"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."
"Anyone can use it, the protection is good, and they have all of the features."
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"I rate the initial setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."
"The Webroot cloud console is very powerful."
"Their policy management, their cloud-based dashboard and user interface are very easy to navigate."
"Low performance requirements."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It took five minutes. I installed the solution myself."
"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."
"Detections could be improved."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"The VirusScan needs to improve in order to detect ransomware and other advanced threats."
"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."
"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 isn't so easy. You need to know what you are doing."
"Some agents become old and then they don't communicate well any longer."
"We have had some of our clients not happy with McAfee Endpoint Security because it blocks some of the applications they are trying to use. They should make it easier to unblock applications."
"The management console is a little bit difficult to understand for admins. You need a lot of time in order to become familiar with that. It is a little bit complicated and not too easy to understand. Its price can also be improved. Its price is higher than its competitors. McAfee also needs to have better cloud integration and more data centers in the EU. The cloud center should be in Europe or in Germany. In Germany, it is really important to have access to your data within the same country. Customer data needs to be placed and processed in the same country."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"They should provide more information on the type of cyber attacks."
"The solution could improve by providing better ransomware protection."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 30 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, Intercept X Endpoint and Bitdefender GravityZone Enterprise Security. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.