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

Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention vs Trellix Intrusion Prevention System comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks Advanced...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Intrusion Preventio...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 7.5%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Intrusion Prevention System is 3.2%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Carlos Bracamonte - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, simple to install and good technical support
We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection. I'm not sure what the remaining threat protection features are off the top of my head. But beyond that, we use URL filtering. We have three approved cases for using external dynamic lists that are stored in a bucket repository. Then, for each URL site that needs to be whitelisted, we add it to the external dynamic list in order to gain access to this email. I would like Wildfire to be implemented. We use the equivalent in Cisco is the integration policies. We have the Wildfire but we are not currently implementing it. We don't have the license to use it, but we are not currently implementing it until we present the use cases that the company gives some value to and they approve the use of it.
Juan Muriel - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects from attacks in real-time and provides accurate threat intelligence updates
I rate the ease of setup a seven or eight out of ten. The platform functions very well. We need technical support to make improvements to the platform. The deployment takes eight months. We need two or three system engineers and one electronic engineer specialized in Trellix platforms to deploy the tool. We need only one system engineer to maintain the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You can scale the product."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
"It's very easy to use and configure. What is nice about Palo Alto is that even if you don't understand how to use it, you can just click on upload and upload everything that needs to be blocked."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the market leader as far as security gateways and endpoint protection. Additionally, the threat database that is used is one of the best."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
"The threat intelligence updates are very accurate."
"The feature I found most valuable is the network threat analyzer in the security platform. It also integrates with GTI, or Global Threat Intelligence. Otherwise, I just use the basic features."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is a good product for dealing with DDoS attacks and for the inspection of network traffic."
"The most valuable features in Trellix for me are the automated signature updates. It is a great and convenient feature."
"The ability to centrally manage all the IPS sensors, track the different security events generated by it, and customize the different policies, depending on their location."
"McAfee NSP is much more stable than Cisco."
"The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of signatures in IPS."
"Overall the solution is very good. It offers great protection and gives us a good overview of what is on the network."
 

Cons

"The solution could benefit from improved AI analytics to predict potential attacks before they occur, similar to NDR systems."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the only thing I don't like is the support."
"The installation was complicated."
"We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection."
"The technology firewall anomaly network could stand improvement."
"Sometimes when you want to group a set of ports, and communicate with Palo Alto, you cannot group TCP and UDP ports together. This needs to be adjusted."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"Some of the documentation is not as straightforward as it could be."
"The solution could improve some aspects of detection."
"The platform’s GUI could be the latest."
"There are limited resources for configuration guidance."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The technical support must be improved."
"The solution needs to improve the graphical interface. And they had a limitation in some of the sensor modems as well."
"The management console needs to be less complex and easier to navigate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"It's not too expensive."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"The price of the solution is higher than others on the market. A price reduction would be beneficial if it does not impact their database quality."
"The pricing and the licensing are pretty competitive at this stage. As a reseller, I would like to see the price come down a little bit so I can compete better against other firewalls because we do that all the time."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve by having consistent pricing at system levels."
"It is an expensive solution and I would like to see a drop in price."
"The product’s pricing is expensive for small companies."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"The tool is competitively priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?
Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is quite competitive, offering extensive threat detection and prevention capabilities, though it is priced higher than some alternatives. I would rate ...
What do you like most about McAfee Network Security Platform?
The threat intelligence updates are very accurate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Network Security Platform?
The tool is competitively priced. I rate the pricing a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with McAfee Network Security Platform?
Network Threat Behavior Analysis must be improved. The technical support must be improved. The support team must provide better help with configurations of devices and enabling NTBA.
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee Network Security Platform, McAfee NSP, IntruShield Network Intrusion Prevention System, IntruShield Network IPS
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Desjardins Group, HollyFrontier, Nubia, Agbar, WNS Global Services, INAIL, Universidad de Las Américas Puebla (UDLAP), Cook County, China Pacific Insurance, Bank Central Asia, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, City of Chicago, Macquarie Telecom, Sutherland Global Services, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, United Automotive Electronic Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention vs. Trellix Intrusion Prevention System and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.