We performed a comparison between Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"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."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"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."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"One of the most valuable features is its antivirus database, which is current and updated daily. Another valuable feature is its capacity to be managed by a single server. The solution is managed by a secure server, so all the endpoints are managed from a central point."
"It is good for detecting signature-based viruses, and it is user friendly."
"Scalability."
"It's a robust product."
"The centralized console is great for us. It gives us one centralized console to manage all of the endpoints."
"The solution is completely scalable."
"It's good for large organizations. It's able to handle a lot of users."
"When they started they found it very easy; not easy to implement but easy to use. We started with the headquarters here and later we also implemented it for all the subsidiaries in the region, in other countries. They have a centralized solution, so they can help other countries in management."
"What I like most about McAfee MVISION Endpoint is that it's very user-friendly. You do need some knowledge on how to navigate the portal, but as soon as you've gained that knowledge, navigation will no longer be an issue. I have no complaints about McAfee MVISION Endpoint. For me, the product is perfect the way it is. It's great right now, and it's doing good as it is."
"The performance is good."
"We have a cloud-based instance, so we can deploy all our configurations through the cloud. That's the beauty of FireEye."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"If the network has seen something, we can use that to put a block to all the endpoints."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
"MVISION offers decent protection."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between environments."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"It should support the next-generation IPS. Currently, it supports only IPS."
"Overall, the price could be reduced."
"It can be improved in terms of features and integration. It should have more advanced features and more integration. Currently, it is just talking to their own solutions. They could add more artificial intelligence, more XDR, and more integration with other vendors so that we can do sharing of information with other vendors."
"Sometimes tech support is a bit slow to find a solution."
"In a few cases, when we enable the IPS/IDS feature, there are performance-related issues on the end devices. If we run quite a few features of Symantec, especially the IPS/IDF, it consumes a lot of processing and memory capacity."
"There are a few negative points. They should separate the feature for each separate solution for mobile devices. The second one is about the price, it's expensive. Finally, the third would be the complexity of implementation."
"Symantec End-point production doesn't support the EDR function."
"Is not a full anti-ransomware solution."
"The email protection isn't efficient enough, and I'd like to see DLP features in the next release."
"We would like to solution to offer better security."
"Sometimes, one might face issues with the scalability of the product. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve by an overall simplification of the solution."
"The price of McAfee MVISION Endpoint could improve."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"They have something called Managed Detection and Response. They get intel from their customers, and that intel is shared with the rest of FireEye's customers. I want to subscribe to their intel, but that is not available to us."
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 49 reviews. Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, 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 Open EDR. See our Symantec Endpoint Security vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) 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.