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

Snare vs Trellix Helix Connect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 2026

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

Snare
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
44th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (40th)
Trellix Helix Connect
Ranking in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
19th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Security Incident Response (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) category, the mindshare of Snare is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Helix Connect is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Trellix Helix Connect1.1%
Snare0.6%
Other98.3%
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)
 

Featured Reviews

Frank Eargle - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at Glasshouse Systems
A highly scalable solution that is easy to manage and super easy to set up
We use Snare for picking up Windows logs, and we used to use it for SQL as well. We had used it for Linux once or twice. We're mainly using it for Windows and Windows flat files The most valuable feature of Snare is flexibility or the ability to filter all things you don't want and don't have…
Ronald Vera Paz - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at Boomslang Tech
Automation through playbooks has transformed incident response and continuously improves detection
The best features Trellix Helix Connect offers include automation through playbooks and SOAR capability, which has been the most impactful feature for me. It helps by standardizing response actions, reducing manual steps, decreasing mean time to contain, and minimizing analyst fatigue. Automation made the biggest operational difference.Before Helix playbooks, our workflow was manual and large. Analysts reviewed EDR alerts, then checked Active Directory logs manually, looked up hash reputation in different tools such as VirusTotal and Hybrid-Analyzer, then verified if the endpoint is critical, reported an incident, and created a ticket with the SOC, NOC, or a different help desk, and perhaps contacted IT for containment of the incident. That process could take up to one hour for medium-severity events. After we implemented playbooks, we designed a conditional playbook for suspicious PowerShell execution. If EDR flags encoded PowerShell and the user account is privileged, there are different options. Then automatically it isolates the endpoint, calculates risk score, creates an incident ticket, notifies the corresponding SOC channel, and enriches the information with threat intelligence. Another positive organizational impact will be faster incident triage, reduced alert noise through correlation, better cross-domain visibility for endpoint, network, and identity when you work in a Trellix environment in your infrastructure, improved reporting for leadership, and increased SOC maturity and operation consistency. Trellix Helix Connect has made a significant impact on my organization because I can reduce mean time to contain, improve alert quality, standardize incident handling with playbook enforcement, and provide stronger executive reporting on Helix incident metrics improving MTDD and MTTC tracking as well as internal risk posture reporting. Overall, it has an impact because it helps transition the organization from tool-centric monitoring to orchestrated intelligence-driven response, improving operational maturity, analyst productivity, and measurable security performance indicators. For metrics, before Helix, our Mean Time to Detect was managed through manual correlation across tools. After implementing Helix correlation and enrichment, the average MTTD reduced to between twenty and twenty-five minutes. The MTTC reduced on average to between one and two hours.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best thing about Snare is its format and consistency."
"Snare has good agents, especially for Windows."
"The most valuable feature of Snare is flexibility or the ability to filter all things you don't want and don't have security value."
"The integration is very useful and very easy. You can have an API connection with any cloud and I'll be able to do both ways of communication with the help of APA."
"The best feature of Trellix Helix Connect is its quick implementation."
"I advise other customers to choose Trellix Helix, as it improves operations significantly with more efficient responses required for various scenarios they face."
"FireEye Helix's best features are its speed and use of an easy-to-understand language to send queries to the raw logs."
"Trellix Helix Connect has positively impacted my organization as it is the most important tool to provide MDR service to our clients, which has resulted in specific outcomes and improvements."
"Overall, Trellix Helix Connect has an impact because it helps transition the organization from tool-centric monitoring to orchestrated intelligence-driven response, improving operational maturity, analyst productivity, and measurable security performance indicators."
"The product offers very strong automation. Our cyber security analysts don't have to correlate the information to detect problems. They only need to analyze problems that have been identified by the platform."
"We have started working with various customers, one of whom is particularly concerned about adjacency. We have identified several use cases where automation is possible."
 

Cons

"Users will initially find it difficult to identify the event types and installation in Snare."
"Snare should modernize its GUI a little bit."
"The solution is now developing a SIEM-like feature on Snare Central Server, but it's not complete yet."
"The graphical user interface could be improved. It's not easy to handle and it's not easy for a customer or end-user to learn how to manage the solution."
"While we have top customer support and this solution is highly beneficial, there is room for improvement due to the fusion of McAfee and FireEye, which has caused some lapses in support."
"I think the usability of hyperautomation is something to improve in the solution because it is expensive regarding the needed improvements."
"Trellix Helix's configuration and learning could be improved to identify normal traffic from abnormal and to identify trusted domains."
"Sometimes the rules are disabled by FireEye, and we basically get it after the patch. I think there needs to be a better way of creating the application rules. I would like to see better pricing for our licensing."
"There is room for improvement in the integration capabilities of third-party tools."
"We often rely on Martins to create logs and provide professional threat services rather than basic support."
"Trellix needs to address the price for the product to be more appealing to customers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate Snare's pricing a four out of ten."
"Snare has reasonable pricing."
"Snare is a cheap solution because a lot of customers are using it."
"I rate Trellix Helix a five out of ten for pricing."
"The price could be better. But I think it's rightly placed when we buy everything in one shot, and we get some discount for that. That's how we basically plan our deployment, and it's holistic. We pay for the license yearly."
"It could be cheaper, but that applies to every product."
"FireEye Helix is a little expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are best for your needs.
882,479 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Snare?
The best thing about Snare is its format and consistency.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Snare?
Snare is a cheap solution because a lot of customers are using it.
What needs improvement with Snare?
Users will initially find it difficult to identify the event types and installation in Snare.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Helix?
The price of Trellix Helix is competitive in the market. It is not the cheapest but also not the most expensive. As for additional costs beyond standard licensing fees, there are none.
What needs improvement with FireEye Helix?
To improve Trellix Helix Connect, I think it is possible to enhance the dashboard to share more information about the incidents. For example, if I want to check a MITRE technique, maybe it is neces...
What is your primary use case for FireEye Helix?
My main use case for Trellix Helix Connect is to provide an MDR service to our clients. We use Trellix Helix Connect to correlate the alerts and automate the response most often. For example, we us...
 

Also Known As

No data available
FireEye Helix, FireEye Threat Analytics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Military, Defence and Security Agencies, Banking Finance and Insurance companies, Retail, Health and Utilities.
Police Bank, Verisk Analytics, Teck Resources
Find out what your peers are saying about Snare vs. Trellix Helix Connect and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,479 professionals have used our research since 2012.