We performed a comparison between Trellix Active Response and Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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 stable and scalable."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"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 price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
"The product is user-friendly."
"Blocking browser navigation is a feature of the solution with which we have experienced success."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"The product's initial setup phase was very straightforward since you just need to install it, and it works."
"This is a stable product."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"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."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"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."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"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 endpoints and utilization are too high, which impacts the production activity."
"The main drawbacks are resources and processing time, as it consumes a lot of CPU and RAM."
"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."
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 Trellix Active Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.