We performed a comparison between Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"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."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is stable and scalable."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"A great feature of this solution is that it is very well-integrated with antivirus software. Other ADR solutions are implemented as single technologies and are not integrated with the provider, but Symantec offers AV plus ADR."
"There are times when Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response tags an executable as malicious when it is trying to get executed on the machine. In this case, it prevents the execution and it gives you a process view of things where you can look into what has happened and whether it is a genuine process trying to access some system activities, or it's a malicious one. Depending upon the process, it gives you a clear identification, and we can do the containment from the interface itself and isolate the machine from the network. The process review on network isolation is good."
"IPS and the user interface are good features."
"The solution is scalable."
"I've mainly found the antivirus and antispyware features valuable. The documentation is okay as well."
"I like Symantec EDR's device control and USB security features."
"The solution does all that we expect it to do."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its dashboard."
"I found the initial setup to be easy."
"The investigation and forensic analysis have been most helpful."
"The exploit guard and malware protection features are very useful. The logon tracker feature is also very useful. They have also given new modules such as logout backup, process backup. We ordered these modules from the FireEye market place, and we have installed these modules. We are currently exploring these features."
"The technical support services are good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
"The most valuable features of McAfee MVISION Endpoint are advanced threat protection, web filtering, and removable storage devices in the DLP."
"Technical support is excellent."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"Detections could be improved."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"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."
"One potential area for improvement in Symantec EDR is the reporting engine."
"The solution can always be more stable and more secure."
"Reporting is a major issue, as it is not user friendly."
"The interface is very complicated."
"The interface has many issues."
"It would be nice to see more granular timeline analysis."
"They need to improve their cloud presence."
"It should be easier to deploy Symantec's client for end-users."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"They could also increase or improve the scalability because to my knowledge the biggest bandwidth can only support up to 10 gigs of input."
"Upgrading to new versions isn't easy and it can take a long time. Also, other solutions' tamper protection features are better than FireEye's. Clients should have access to our local information, but they shouldn't change settings on the system itself."
"Most of these types of solutions including others, such as Carbon Black and FortiEDR, all have the same features. However, Carbon Black is the leader when it comes to being robust and user-friendly and this solution should improve in those areas to stay more competitive."
"The solution lacks device control."
"It has very good integrations. However, its integration with Palo Alto was not good, and they seem to be working on it at the backend. It is not very resource-hungry, but it can be even better in terms of resource utilization. It could be improved in terms of efficiency, memory sizing, and disk consumption by agents."
"You do not have access to all the features when you use the Trellix web interface. For example, you cannot do device or drive encryption from the web interface. Also, when we're working with customers, it's sometimes challenging to get sales support. Delays mean we might lose an opportunity. Lastly, Trellix lacks some documentation about custom features."
More Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is ranked 24th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 28 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is ranked 19th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 49 reviews. Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is rated 7.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response writes "A highly stable and affordable solution for detecting and preventing security threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) writes "Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup". Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Vision One, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert, Bitdefender GravityZone EDR and Fidelis Elevate, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is most compared with Trellix Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and Open EDR. See our Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.