We performed a comparison between Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint 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."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."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"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."
"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 product is user-friendly."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"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 most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"If there is any malicious behavior in the workstation or server, the tool stops or isolates it automatically and generates alerts."
"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."
"I like its reporting."
"It is stable and easy to set up."
"The data analysis is the most valuable because of the whitelist database. It is different than standard IDS solutions."
"It has intelligent learning behind it and we have been very successful in preventing attacks."
"The product allows us to focus on endpoint and antivirus protection."
"We have another piece of that infrastructure that does what they call threat emulation. It's like sandboxing where it takes files that it doesn't know about, puts them in a VM-type environment, and it kicks them off to see if there's any malware or tendencies that might look like malware, that kind of thing."
"I feel that the initial setup was straightforward and not complex."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is one of the best EDR tools in the market."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"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 SIEM could be improved."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The support needs improvement."
"The solution is not stable."
"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 CPU utilization of the product is quite high compared to its competitors."
"The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"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 dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
"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."
"I would like to see improvements made so that we can better see all of the processes."
"The EDR portion could be better. I'm not a big fan, but it works."
"Occasionally, we'll have issues with the latest version and they'll basically tell us that they will improve it in the next iteration. They need to work on their version release quality."
"They will most likely need to create or include a feature that checks the network."
"Sensor deployment requires extensive fine-tuning, and creating deployment packages is time-consuming."
"The pricing could be more reasonable."
"The solution needs expanded endpoint query tools."
"The local technical support is very poor, but the support from headquarters is very nice."
More Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 17 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 12th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 62 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is rated 7.4, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 8.0. 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 VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), Trellix Active Response, Cynet, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint 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.