We performed a comparison between Microsoft Sentinel and Trellix ESM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The AI and ML of Azure Sentinel are valuable. We can use machine learning models at the tenant level and within Office 365 and Microsoft stack. We don't need to depend upon any other connectors. It automatically provisions the native Microsoft products."
"The pricing of the product is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high."
"The best functionality that you can get from Azure Sentinel is the SOAR capability. So, you can estimate any type of activity, such as when an alert was triggered or an incident was found."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"It is quite efficient. It helps our clients in identifying their security issues and respond quickly. Our clients want to automate incident response and all those things."
"The Identity Behavior tab furnishes us with the entire history linked to each IP or domain that has either accessed or attempted to access our system."
"The AI capability is one of the main features of the solution because I believe that in the market, there are few solutions that are providing security solutions based on AI and machine learning."
"I like the ease of deployment."
"The most valuable feature is that if the scanning does find something, it quarantines it. Then you can decide what you are going to do with it."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. Over the years I have always been using this solution and have become comfortable with it."
"It blocks the things which are not to be allowed. It has an adaptive mode where it learns for itself."
"It is easy to use and deploy. It comes with user-friendly manuals."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation rules."
"McAfee as a whole is a good solution."
"It is a good central viewpoint for issues. These can then be investigated in more detail on the subnet server(s)/endpoints."
"We have been working with multiple customers, and every time we onboard a customer, we are missing an essential feature that surprisingly doesn't exist in Sentinel. We searched the forums and knowledge bases but couldn't find a solution. When you onboard new customers, you need to enable the data connectors. That part is easy, but you must create rules from scratch for every associated connector. You click "next," "next," "next," and it requires five clicks for each analytical rule. Imagine we have a customer with 150 rules."
"The solution should allow for a streamlined CI/CD procedure."
"The only thing is sometimes you can have a false positive."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"At the network level, there is a limitation in integrating some of the switches or routers with Microsoft Sentinel. Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if LAN traffic monitoring or SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market."
"It has been a challenge with Azure Sentinel to onboard the Syslog server from FortiGate. Azure Sentinel can work better on that shift between the Syslog server and a firewall."
"Its documentation is not so simple. It is easy for somebody who is Microsoft certified or more closely attached to Microsoft solutions. It is not easy for those who are working on open-source platforms. There isn't a central point where everything is documented, and there is no specific training or certification."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"I would like to see improvements to the user interface."
"Cloud integration has room for improvement because they're not full-fledged to integrate with the cloud solutions that come. They use different integration platforms to bring in data, and that needs to be improved."
"Update to user interface from version 9 is cosmetic in some aspects, and after a few clicks you are back on the old interface."
"We cannot add new data sources to the most recent version."
"I would like to see good analytics in future releases."
"Product-wise, adding accounts on a single data source by batch would be a really great help."
"The solution needs to improve case management. The UI is confusing."
Microsoft Sentinel is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 86 reviews while Trellix ESM is ranked 18th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 34 reviews. Microsoft Sentinel is rated 8.2, while Trellix ESM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Sentinel writes "Gives a comprehensive and holistic view of the ecosystem and improves visibility and the ability to respond". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix ESM writes "Provides visibility of all the traffic within the company infrastructure". Microsoft Sentinel is most compared with AWS Security Hub, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh, Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Elastic Security, whereas Trellix ESM is most compared with ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, LogRhythm SIEM and SQRRL. See our Microsoft Sentinel vs. Trellix ESM report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
