Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Network Analytics
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (23rd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (3rd), Cisco Security Portfolio (4th)
Trellix Network Detection a...
Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is 7.6%, down from 10.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Network Detection and Response is 1.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Network Detection and Response (NDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Rainier S. - PeerSpot reviewer
You are able to drill down into a center's utilization, then create reports based on it
In the last year or two, we have been working with our Cisco NAS engineers to improve our security posturing. It is more our being proactive rather than reactive. While Stealthwatch and Lancope have this ability to look inside and give you visibility (a great feature), follow-up is the rule. We would like filters that you can put into place to tap onto certain types of behaviors, alerts out, and/or hopefully a block. This is sort of what we are looking for. I might be speaking too early, because we are not down this path yet. We know the feature set is there, we just do not know yet how to achieve it. That is proactive rather than more reactive. For Lancope Stealthwatch, we would like to see it more on the ASA Firewall platform. While this might already be available, this is more a failing of Cisco to inform us if it is there. For example: * Are we on the right or wrong version of the code? * What does the code look like? * Are we are really looking at firewalls? Or is it more about the foundation and route switches that we are seeing? It is about visibility.
BiswabhanuPanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment. That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried. The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful. There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere. The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file. There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution's analytics and thrust detection capabilities are good. We're still adjusting it. It's a little hypersensitive, but it is working right now."
"Able to drill down into a center's utilization, then create reports based on it."
"There are already many functionalities, so I don't think there is anything to improve."
"I believe this solution has reduced our incident response time."
"The most valuable feature is its alerts and dashboard."
"It's a dependable product that is able to pinpoint where we have vulnerabilities if they occur."
"Using this solution has helped us to detect and identify viruses or malicious activity in the network early on."
"It works efficiently for encrypted traffic analysis."
"Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"It allows us to be more hands off in checking on emails and networking traffic. We can set up a bunch of different alerts and have it alert us."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"I also like its logging method. Its logging is very powerful and useful for forensic purposes. You can see the traffic or a specific activity or how something entered your network and where it went."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how it allows users to do the investigation part. Another important part of the product that is valuable is associated with how it gives information to users in the form of a storyline."
 

Cons

"The overall visibility into the actual device itself would be helpful. I don't just want support-specific data, but also to be able to see information such as CPU and other internal components or usage of the devices."
"It hasn't really improved our direct detection rate but it has definitely reduced our incident response time as we wouldn't have been able to detect threats or immediate risks without this solution."
"One thing I would like to see improved is if it could automatically be tied through ISE, instead of you having to manually get notifications and disable it yourself."
"The ability to be natively integrated into Port Aggregator would be beneficial because it would reduce just one more component that's needed in order to have that type of view."
"The visualization could be improved, the GUI is not the best."
"The usability of this solution needs to be improved."
"The initial setup was straightforward but required a lot of data entry, to begin with building out the server types and network types."
"We've had problems with element licensing costs so scalability is a concern."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Certain features in Trellix Network Detection and Response, such as using AL-type commands, may initially pose a challenge for those unfamiliar with such commands. However, once users become accustomed to the system, it becomes easier to use."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
"Improvements could be achieved through greater integration capabilities with different firewall solutions. Integrating with the dashboard itself for different firewalls so users can also pull tags into their firewall dashboard."
"The product's integration capabilities are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"FireEye Network Security should have better integration with other vendors' firewalls or proxies, such as Palo Alto and Fortinet. Files that are being submitted should happen through the API or automatically."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"It would be very helpful if there were better integration with other solutions from other vendors, such as Fortinet and Palo Alto."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"One of the things which bugs me about Lancope is the licensing. We understand how licensing works. Our problem is when we bought and purchased most of these Lancope devices, we did so with our sister company. Somewhere within the purchase and distribution, licensing got mixed up. That is all on Cisco, and it is their responsibility. They allotted some of our sister company's equipment to us, and some of our equipment to them. To date, they have never been able to fix it."
"On a yearly basis, licensing is somewhere around $30,000."
"This is an expensive product. We have quit paying for support because we don't want to have to upgrade it and keep paying for it."
"The tool is not cheaply priced."
"Today, we are part of the big Cisco ELA, and it is a la carte. We can get orders for whatever we want. At the end of the day, we have to pay for it in one big expense, but that is fine. We are okay with that."
"​Licensing is done by flows per second, not including outside (in traffic)."
"Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD."
"It is worth the cost."
"Because of what the FireEye product does, it has significantly decreased our mean time in being able to identify and detect malicious threats. The company that I work with is a very mature organization, and we have seen the meantime to analysis decrease by at least tenfold."
"There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product."
"Its price is a bit high. A small customer cannot buy it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."
"The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced."
"When I compare this solution to its competitors in the market, I find that it is a little expensive."
"Pricing and licensing are reasonable compared to competitors."
"When you purchase FireEye Network Security NX, will need to purchase a megabit per second package. You must know your needs from day one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
30%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Stealthwatch?
The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is the Threat Intelligence integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Stealthwatch?
The tool is not cheaply priced. In cybersecurity, you want an extra layer of security in your organization. Some sectors want NDR solutions, so you cannot deploy such tools everywhere, as they are ...
What needs improvement with Cisco Stealthwatch?
The expensive nature of the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required.
What do you like most about FireEye Network Security?
We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced. It's a bit on the expensive side, but we don't want to compromise with cheap, less r...
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
The solution's support needs to improve their support.
 

Also Known As

Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Network Analytics vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.