We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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)."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"This is stable and scalable."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features."
"This is a stable product."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"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."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"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."
"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."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"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."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"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 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."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The solution lacks the ability to integrate with external platforms. In future releases of the solution, I would like to see the solution increase its integration capabilities with external platforms."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"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."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Trellix Active Response is ranked 57th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews. Trellix Active Response is rated 6.4, while Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Trellix Active Response writes "Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support". On the other hand, 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". Trellix Active Response is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), whereas Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Cynet, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Trend Vision One.
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.