We compared Trellix Endpoint Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Trellix offers a comprehensive management console and easy setup process, with a wide range of features. However, it could improve in terms of agent communication and user experience. In contrast, VMware Carbon Black Endpoint has a more challenging initial setup but excels in continuous monitoring, incident detection and response. It could benefit from improvements in areas such as GUI, integration, and support. Overall, Trellix may have an advantage in user-friendly setup and management, while Carbon Black stands out in threat detection and response capabilities.
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The stability is very good."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to manage the solution from anywhere and having an overview of the companies security."
"McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection is stable. We don't have any bugs being reported."
"I think the costing is fine compared to other products. Cost-wise you definitely get value for your money."
"The primary reason the solution is good is because of its ease-of-use."
"The solution provides dashboard control, so we can centrally monitor the entire status of our organization."
"The endpoint security, antivirus and firewall are the most valuable features of Trellix Endpoint Security."
"The product is fairly reliable."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"I like its protection very much. It protects and allows us to lock the environment pretty tightly. Nothing that is not approved through Carbon Black can run in the environment. There is no default. Everything goes through Carbon Black Protect, and everything has to be first approved. Every software is considered to be guilty before prove innocent."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of VMware Carbon Black Endpoint was easy."
"I rate Carbon Black CB Defense an eight out of ten for the ease of its initial setup."
"The product enables device controls, helping us protect the devices and prevent data leakages."
"Carbon Black has very good market strategies."
"The offline networking is the most important feature. Some of our users are engineers that work offsite, and they can still be on the solution, which is also great."
"What I like the most about it is the dynamic grouping, where you get to group endpoints based on setup criteria. That's pretty cool. I like the simplified policy management and simplified white-listing process."
"The data analysis is the most valuable because of the whitelist database. It is different than standard IDS solutions."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"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."
"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 is not stable."
"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product."
"McAfee GW Security and McAfee Child Safety need some improvement as they are relatively new."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"Although they have increased the complexity, it has affected the scanning speed."
"The solution should provide a more easy way to uninstall it on specific stations."
"Technical support is an area that can be improved because sometimes, the response time is a bit slow and the explanation is short."
"The solution's technical support should be improved since we faced a lot of issues with the support. There were some delays in responses from the technical support."
"The solution takes up a high amount of memory and can cause the system to hang."
"As far as I know, Carbon Defense has nothing that can be installed on mobile devices. It lacks a defense solution for mobile devices, especially mobile tablets. I would like to see support for mobile devices and the pricing should be less than the pricing for a normal workstation."
"It is difficult to extract reports for ongoing scans"
"It would be a better solution if Carbon Black Cb Defense had an on-promise solution and a virus auto delete or quarantine."
"With the on-prem one, the bug has been reported by the community in early January or February, something like that, at the beginning of the year, and it's still not addressed. They have released two versions since then, and yet neither of them addresses this specific issue."
"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."
"The solution has to mature on container security and a lot of cloud environment security."
"Its compatibility can be improved. It did crash a server during deployment, which is not something that I want to happen. Its deployment should also be easier. The whole deployment cycle needs to be simplified. It is an enterprise solution, and to set it up right now, you have to be an expert."
"The EDR portion could be better. I'm not a big fan, but it works."
Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 96 reviews while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 62 reviews. Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is rated 8.0. 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 VMware Carbon Black Endpoint writes "Centralization via the cloud allows us to protect and control people working from home". Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas VMware Carbon Black Endpoint is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our Trellix Endpoint Security vs. VMware Carbon Black Endpoint 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.