We performed a comparison between Elastic Security and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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 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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The feature that we have found the most valuable is scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Security is that you can install agents, and they are not separately licensed."
"I can look at events from more than one source across multiple different locations and find patterns or anomalies. The machine learning capabilities are helpful, and I can create rules for notifications to be more proactive rather than responding after something has gone wrong."
"The performance is good and it is faster than IBM QRadar."
"Its flexibility is most valuable. We can have a number of scenarios, and we can get logs from anything. If we know how to use Logstash, we can tweak it in many ways. This makes the logging search on Elastic very easy."
"The solution has a good community surrounding it for lots of helpful documentation for troubleshooting purposes."
"It's open-source and free to use."
"The most valuable feature for me is Discover."
"The features we have found most valuable have been containment as well as the ability to triage agent activities."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"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."
"Provides protection against threats."
"The most valuable network security feature is the network sandbox solution. This sandbox feature works on traffic flow."
"If the network has seen something, we can use that to put a block to all the endpoints."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"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."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The solution is not stable."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"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."
"It could use maybe a little more on the Linux side."
"The interface could be more user friendly because it is sometimes hard to deal with."
"We are paying dearly for the guy who is working on the ELK Stack. That knowledge is quite rare and hard to come by. For difficulty and availability of resources, I would rate it a five out of 10."
"The solution needs to be more reactive to investigations. We need to be able to detect and prevent any attacks before it can damage our infrastructure. Currently, this solution doesn't offer that."
"We'd like to see some more artificial intelligence capabilities."
"Elastic Security has a steep learning curve, so it takes some time to tune it and set it up for your environment. There are some costs associated with logging things that don't have value. So you need to be cautious to only log things that make sense and keep them around for as long as you need. You shouldn't hold onto things just because you think you might need them."
"It would be better if Elastic Security had less storage for data. My customers do not like this. Other vendors have local support in different countries, but Elastic Security doesn't. I would like to have Operational Technology (OT) security in the next release."
"There isn't really a very good user experience. You need a lot of training."
"The product’s on-premise version is costly in terms of extra charges for SQL database and Windows server licenses."
"I hope the solution can be used in cloud systems going forward."
"The performance could be better. I noticed that it slows down a bit."
"Looking at the current ePolicy orchestrator, and the transition of most vendors to the cloud, they need to do an improvement with the current dashboard or the overall aesthetic of their GUI."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
"There should be better integration between the ePolicy Orchestrator and FireEye console. The integration of both consoles should be better."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"The technical support needs some improvement. When product distribution errors occur, we have to contact technical support, which is a very tedious task."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Elastic Security is ranked 16th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 59 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 18th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 7.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, 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 Trend Vision One Endpoint Security. See our Elastic Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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.