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

Trellix Advanced Threat Defense vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

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

Trellix Advanced Threat Def...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
23rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Network Detection a...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Network Detection and Response (NDR) (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Trellix Advanced Threat Defense is 1.5%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Network Detection and Response is 5.0%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

HS
Easy to set up and use with a nice interface
The scalability could be better. We'd like them to be better at dealing with script threats. In sandboxing, the time to respond is slower than we would like. We'd like them to be able to process faster. For example, Fortinet, they are doing 18,000 files per hour. For Wildfire, it is elastic. It can support as many files as you get. McAfee doesn't react like that. It does not support interfaces with HTTPS.
BiswabhanuPanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment. That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried. The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful. There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere. The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file. There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Provides good exfiltration, and is an all-in-one product."
"The most valuable features are the administration console and its detection and response module."
"It is stable and reliable."
"I recommend this solution because of its ease of use."
"It is very scalable."
"It stops in excess of twenty-five malware events per month, all of which could be critical to the business."
"Its greatest strength is the DXL client which can rapidly disseminate attack information to all clients via the McAfee Agent instead of going through the ePO server."
"If we are receiving spam emails, or other types of malicious email coming from a particular email ID, then we are able to block them using this solution."
"The server appliance is good."
"Before FireEye, most of the times that an incident would happen nobody would be able to find out where or why the incident occurred and that the system is compromised. FireEye is a better product because if the incident already happened I know that the breach is there and that the system is compromised so we can take appropriate action to prevent anything from happening."
"Initially, we didn't have much visibility around what is occurring at our applications lower level. For instance, if we are exposed to any malicious attacks or SQL injections. But now we've integrated FireEye with Splunk, so now we get lots of triggers based on policy content associated with FireEye. The solution has allowed for growth and improvement in our information security and security operations teams."
"The scalability has not been a problem. We have deployed the product in very high bandwidth networks. We have never had a problem with the FireEye product causing latency issues within our networks."
"The product has helped improve our organization by being easy to use and integrate. This saves time, trouble and money."
"The installation phase was easy."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from how it allows users to do the investigation part. Another important part of the product that is valuable is associated with how it gives information to users in the form of a storyline."
 

Cons

"I would like to see future versions of the solution incorporate artificial intelligence technology."
"We'd like them to be better at dealing with script threats."
"The initial setup was industry standard complex. It takes awhile and has a lot of planning involved. It could be simplified with product redesign."
"There could be a tool that automatically updates all-new Microsoft IPs, which are available for free to connect to the client."
"Make the ATD system a part of the whole product and take the whole thing onto the cloud. While it is there already, it is not to the same level as the on-premise version."
"Lacks remote capabilities not dependent on the internet."
"This solution needs to be made "cloud ready"."
"Technical support needs improvement as sometimes engineers are not available promptly, especially during high-severity incidents."
"Based on what we deployed, they should emphasize the application filtering and the web center. We need to look deeper into the SSM inspection. If we get the full solution with that module, we don't need to get the SSM database from another supplier."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The world is currently shifting to AI, but FIreEye is not following suit."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"I would love to see better reporting. Because you can't export some of the reports in proper formats, it is hard to extract the data from reports."
"The initial setup was complex because of the nature of our environment. When it comes to the type of applications and functions which we were looking at in terms of identifying malicious threats, there would be some level of complexity, if we were doing it right."
"The problem with FireEye is that they don't allow VM or sandbox customization. The user doesn't have control of the VMs that are inside the box. It comes from the vendor as-is. Some users like to have control of it. Like what type of Windows and what type of applications and they have zero control over this."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing fees for this solution are approximately one million dollars per year."
"The product is expensive, but it is better than the rest of them in the industry."
"The tool is a bit pricey."
"The user fee is not as high but the maintenance fee is expensive."
"The pricing is a little high."
"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."
"There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product."
"We're partners with Cisco so we get a reasonable price. It's cheaper than Palo Alto in terms of licensing."
"When you purchase FireEye Network Security NX, will need to purchase a megabit per second package. You must know your needs from day one."
"Pricing and licensing are reasonable compared to competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
15%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
I recommend this solution because of its ease of use.
What needs improvement with McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
There could be a tool that automatically updates all-new Microsoft IPs, which are available for free to connect to the client.
What is your primary use case for McAfee Advanced Threat Defense?
We use the solution for client management and security. We used the whole suite for client Firewall, antivirus, and everything provided by Trellix.
What do you like most about FireEye Network Security?
We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. With Trellix, we easily confirmed that there was no lateral network involvement an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced. It's a bit on the expensive side, but we don't want to compromise with cheap, less r...
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
The solution's support needs to improve their support.
 

Also Known As

McAfee Advanced Threat Defense
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Radicati Group, Florida International University, MGM Resorts International, County Durham andDarlington NHS Foundation Trust
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Trellix Advanced Threat Defense vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.