We compared CylancePROTECT and Trend Micro Deep Security based on our users reviews in five parameters. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: When comparing CylancePROTECT and Trend Micro Deep Security, CylancePROTECT is commended for its effortless implementation and precision, as well as its advanced AI-driven user behavior monitoring. However, it receives negative feedback regarding its cost, lack of user-friendliness, and excessive false positives. Conversely, Trend Micro Deep Security delivers supplementary capabilities like vulnerability protection and a firewall, receiving positive evaluations for its performance, customer support, and compatibility. Areas for improvement include reporting, handling dynamic threats, and affordability. Pricing differs for both solutions, and the customer support for Trend Micro is highly acclaimed.
"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."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The stability is very good."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Endpoints are protected in real-time without the need of a centralized server."
"It does a good job of protecting us."
"It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating."
"The deployment of updates is easy."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"The CylancePROTECT agent is very low on CPU usage, so it has virtually no adverse impact on my servers, desktops, or workstations."
"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"We've found stability to be great so far."
"It is connected into an intelligence database and is quick to pick up new threats. It also reduces my workload with its speed and the protection that it provides."
"Support and threat prevention are the most valuable features of this solution."
"They release timely updates and have efficient prediction features for threat detection."
"The user interface is the most valuable feature."
"In terms of valuable features, I would say its intrusion prevention. Each and every IP connecting to the server gets scanned so we know everyone who is accessing our server and we can block whichever IP's do not belong to us at the firewall."
"We like the Smart protection and the Virtual patching."
"Technical support is good."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"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"
"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."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"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."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting."
"CylancePROTECT could be improved in its technical support and communication."
"The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use."
"We would like to see secure integration and multi-factor authentication to be able to access the administration dashboard."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"The initial deployment was quite complicated."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"The risk is very complex. We need our tools to be more intelligent, more automated, more detectable."
"The product isn't very user-friendly."
"There is room for improvement with Trend Micro Deep Security, as there are instances where installations may need to be redone. There seem to be glitches when working with older Windows servers, such as those from 2003 or 2005, requiring us to uninstall and reinstall the product to resolve the issue."
"We'd like to see extended capacity in the on-premises versions."
"Trend Micro Deep Security security and scalability could be improved."
"They are still working on the company integration from TippingPoint because this was a recent acquisition from a few years ago. So, a Tipping Point integration with Deep Security, having one single pane of glass dashboard, would provide us a simple use case."
"Deep Security's most valuable features are antivirus and host intrusion detection."
"Another issue is if I want to suggest this solution to a customer, we won't get the pricing immediately, which is a major problem."
CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Symantec Endpoint Security.
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.