We performed a comparison between Open EDR and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"This is stable and scalable."
"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 a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is stable and scalable."
"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."
"Comodo includes a firewall and antivirus in one solution. I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems. Comodo can even find a lost device and secure it remotely."
"It is very valuable in finding out unknown malware."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"The stability has been great."
"It's a stable solution with good performance."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"The response part of EDR was most valuable. We used that to separate the endpoint from the network. We utilized the solution during the instant response. We were also utilizing advanced malware detection capabilities, but we benefited the most from its help with the response."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"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."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The support needs improvement."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"Detections could be improved."
"Comodo includes a firewall and antivirus in one solution. I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems. Comodo can even find a lost device and secure it remotely."
"The price of McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"The Linux support is very poor. I use base detection. Currently, they are providing malware protection and logon track features in Windows and Mac. These features aren't available in Linux. It will be helpful to extend these capabilities to Linux. We would also like assets grouping and device lock protection features, which are included in their roadmap."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"The reports need more development. They need more details on the reports and more details taking the executive view into consideration."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Open EDR is ranked 46th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 1 review while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Open EDR is rated 8.0, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Open EDR writes "I also like the ability to remotely manage update packages on your systems, and the fact that there is an open source version". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Open EDR is most compared with SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sangfor Endpoint Secure, Trend Micro Apex One and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra Plus, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and SentinelOne Singularity Complete.
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.
