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

Trellix Active Response vs Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Trellix Active Response
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
63rd
Average Rating
6.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Security (...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2024, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Trellix Active Response is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is 2.0%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

LW
Feb 26, 2021
Lighter with good stability and pretty good technical support
It's still not lightweight enough and not as light as they claim to be with the McAfee area of a next-gen AV. They can do some improvements along that line. There needs to be some improvement around the white-listing or black-listing. The product could improve aspects around the removal of blacklisted applications, et cetera. This was an exercise to centralize the AV cell, and that's how we ended up upgrading. The truth, however, is that I was really looking for something much more advanced with user behavior analytics and some AI features that the other competitor's next-gen AV does offer. It is okay for what it's doing now, however, it's not the ultimate software. There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't. They should ensure they are doing parallel development for cloud and on-prem when they are doing R&D.
Venugopal Potumudi - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 7, 2022
Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. Having used Trend Micro as well, I would rate Trend Micro higher. However, I would still choose this product as a second option. When we recommend a product, we would recommend something based on the fit of the product and customer requirements. We worked with Defender, we worked with Trend Micro, and we worked with McAfee. All of them almost overlap in multiple use cases. That said, we do see the customer IT strategy and where they're going, and they are adopting Azure more. We know there are certain limitations in their landscape where there may be some old legacy systems, and in that case, then we would either switch back to McAfee or Trend Micro instead of Defender.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the integration between environments."
"It is a really strong solution for endpoint security."
"The technical support services are good."
"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."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"Provides protection against threats."
"FireEye Endpoint Security's scalability is awesome. I think it is one of the best on that front."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its simplicity."
 

Cons

"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"The product is consolidating its portfolio into one product. It is difficult at the moment."
"I hope the solution can be used in cloud systems going forward."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"The central monitoring dashboard needs improvement."
"We'd like better UI on the management screen."
"The product could be flexible and offer better pricing."
"Impacts performance of the servers quite negatively."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our costs were somewhere around $600K in Trinidad dollars, which might be about $100K US. We have the ETP plus the EDR. Our recent renewal was 1800 licenses as opposed to the full amount. Our transaction cost was about $600K Trinidad dollars, which is somewhere around $90-100K US."
"There's a subscription on a yearly basis. It's not that expensive; it's quite affordable."
"Microsoft Defender is not cheap and from a cost perspective, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is a better option."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint is not very good, and I would rate its cost three out of five, though I won't be able to mention how much its actual price is."
"It is based on an annual subscription."
"The price of the product is similar to the ones in the market that offer the same features."
"It is not so cheap in comparison to Sophos and other solutions."
"We are on an annual subscription for McAfee MVISION Endpoint. The cost for the license could be less expensive."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
814,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
24%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy various components as desired with McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas many othe...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effective program. Its graphical design is such that it makes an extremely useful too...
What do you like most about McAfee MVISION Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.
 

Also Known As

McAfee Active Response
McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (HX)
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Liquor Control Board of Ontario
Tech Resources Limited, Globe Telecom, Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Trellix Active Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.