Lumu vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

Lumu Technologies and Trellix are both solutions in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category. Lumu Technologies is ranked #6 with an average rating of 9.0, while Trellix is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0. Lumu Technologies holds a 3.1% mindshare in NDaR, compared to Trellix’s 2.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Lumu Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 97% of Trellix users who would recommend it.

Lumu

Read 9 Lumu reviews

1,966 Views
1,121 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Trellix Network Detection a...

Read 40 Trellix Network Detection and Response reviews

2,614 Views
915 Comparison Views

97% willing to recommend

Lumu

Trellix Network Detection a...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 6, 2024

Trellix Network Detection and Response and Lumu compete in the network security category, focusing on advanced threat detection and response. Trellix leads with integration and network coverage, while Lumu holds an advantage in cost-effectiveness and streamlined implementation.

Features: Trellix Network Detection and Response offers robust threat analysis with seamless IT infrastructure integration, providing comprehensive network visibility. It supports deep analysis for malicious software, increased attack response, and multiple integrations with other cybersecurity tools. Lumu differentiates itself with continuous compromise assessment and quick delivery of actionable intelligence, emphasizing a simplified user interface, automated response, and the ability to integrate as a complementary tool with existing systems.

Room for Improvement: Trellix could improve its real-time response speed and further simplify its complex integration process for users without extensive technical knowledge. Its alert system could be refined to reduce unnecessary notifications. A more flexible pricing model could also be beneficial. Lumu might enhance its threat visibility prior to alarms going up and could expand its feature set to include deeper incident analysis. More customization options in alert configurations would be useful. Expanding direct integrations with additional third-party tools could also strengthen its offering.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Trellix provides a flexible deployment model, well-suited for complex environments, with extensive backend support and dedicated service resources. Lumu is favored for quick setup, straightforward deployment, efficient onboarding, and responsive support, catering to businesses that seek simplicity and reduced resource investment in deployment procedures.

Pricing and ROI: Trellix generally involves higher initial costs with longer ROI realization, favorable for large enterprises with expansive networks. Lumu requires lower setup costs and offers a quicker ROI path, making it a budget-friendly solution without compromising value. This strategy suits businesses focusing on cost-effectiveness and a speedy ROI, presenting a significant advantage in competitive pricing dynamics.

To learn more, read our detailed Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 peers since 2012

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

Lumu

Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)

6th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (16th)

Trellix Network Detection a...

Ranking in Network Detection and Response (NDR)

9th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Network Detection and Response (NDR) category, the mindshare of Lumu is 3.1%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Network Detection and Response is 2.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Network Detection and Response (NDR) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Lumu	3.1%
Trellix Network Detection and Response	2.7%
Other	94.2%

Network Detection and Response (NDR)

Featured Reviews

Jeremiah Johnson

Director, Information Technology at a educational organization with 201-500 employees

Constant monitoring and analysis boosts network security

There is always room for improvement. I am not giving it a perfect score because I am sure there is something that could be enhanced.Having some sort of certification or training, along with more periodic webinars might be helpful. Having a larger support network would be beneficial. Nobody I know has heard of Lumu, so they are in the same space as Darktrace or CrowdStrike, but people give blank stares. As the community grows for Lumu then that will improve, but that is not really a criticism of Lumu, they simply have not been around that long.

Read full review

Jose Vargas

Agente De Servicios Técnicos at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

Has improved threat detection workflows and supports seamless customer monitoring

The best features Trellix Network Detection and Response offers include very good threat detection, and I believe that it is one of the best XDR tools. For example, ePO and XDR components are very comfortable and similar to many other tools for this type of monitoring, and I have received very good feedback for this tool. What makes Trellix Network Detection and Response stand out for me compared to other tools is the way you can detect threats. It is very easy and comfortable to use, and the detection shows clearly on the screen, which is very easy to understand. Regarding the features, I think that the integration with other platforms is very comfortable with the customer because we can integrate it with any switch or firewall, and it is comfortable to add this tool. Trellix Network Detection and Response has positively impacted my organization as I have improved my knowledge about detection and response. I have already used some other tools such as CrowdStrike and Umbrella, but Trellix is one of the best that I have tested. I believe that for my organization, Trellix has helped a lot with detection and supported our customers effectively. Trellix Network Detection and Response is a great tool that integrates with a lot of security tools such as Palo Alto, which is a good firewall. If you have these types of tools, your organization would benefit greatly.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of it is automated, so I do not have to watch it to get alerts."

"Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time."

"The context provided by the tool is very complete, it includes the miter matrix, playbooks, links, hashes, and much more."

"Lumu has impacted my organization positively by providing continuous visibility into network compromise, allowing us to detect threats that were previously unnoticed, significantly reducing our mean time to detect and improving our ability to quickly validate and respond to incidents."

"You can access external links, playbooks, MITRE Matrix, and a lot of information."

"The tool's support team helps partners resolve any problems with the product."

"I like Lumu's simple user interface. When we deployed it, we got full access, allowing us to identify IP addresses on the network and connect machine names to users. It helped us identify and block threats via the firewall. I also appreciate the chat support and ticket closure process. We're currently reviewing network detection solutions, and my recommendations include Lumu, Sentinel, and a few others. Regarding functionality and user-friendliness, I would recommend Lumu over the others."

"It's been helpful for overall extended network visibility."

More Lumu pros

"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."

"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."

"Both for our clients and for ourselves, ROI was almost 200% more than we expected."

"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."

"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."

"It protects from signature-based attacks and signature-less attacks. The sandboxing technology, invented by FireEye, is very valuable. Our customers go for FireEye because of the sandboxing feature. When there is a threat or any malicious activity with a signature, it can be blocked by IPS. However, attacks that do not have any signatures and are very new can only be blocked by using the sandboxing feature, which is available only in FireEye. So, FireEye has both engines. It has an IPS engine and a sandbox engine, which is the best part. You can get complete network protection by using FireEye."

"I would definitely recommend this product because I have seen many cases where other solutions were not able to catch malware, but FireEye raised a red flag."

More Trellix Network Detection and Response pros

Cons

"It would be good if we could access the physical logs."

"Lumu is solid for compromise detection, but there are a few areas where it could be improved, including deeper integration with SIEM and XDR, asset context enrichment, custom detection tuning, automated response capabilities, and reporting customization."

"Nothing so far needs to be improved."

"Lumu's ability to discover threats is an area of concern where improvements are needed."

"I am happy with the current features. However, one important one is to improve the reports."

"The reports need improvement."

"The free version is minimal compared to the full version."

"Having a larger support network would be beneficial. Nobody I know has heard of Lumu, so they are in the same space as Darktrace or CrowdStrike, but people give blank stares."

More Lumu cons

"It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment."

"A better depth of view, being able to see deeper into the management process, is what I'd like to see."

"The one thing that needs to improve is that they use guidance or FDK for max data."

"I would like to see in Trellix Network Detection and Response more explanation about some details of the threat, and I wish it had more actions that you can take to contain the host or move it somewhere else."

"FireEye’s main feature is its sandboxing or threat emulation capabilities to detect malware with extra add-ons such as signature-based IPS or endpoint protection, but these features are lacking compared to most IPS or endpoint vendors."

"It would be a good idea if we could get an option to block based upon the content of an email, or the content of a file attachment."

"If you want to search the hashes in the environment, you need to put in IOCs one by one, making it a very hectic job."

"There is a lot of room for Improvement in the offering, from cost to functionality. It is pretty straightforward to implement which is an advantage, however, it falls short in pricing, detection capabilities, and, most importantly, reporting and policy management."

More Trellix Network Detection and Response cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to Lumu, other solutions are more expensive. SentinelOne was a bit cheaper, and another provider's price structure is unclear, but Lumu fit our budget nicely. SentinelOne's cost depends on the number of devices, and it might be similar to Lumu's, depending on deployment."

"The tool is available at a good price. The tool offers a good and competitive price for customers."

"It is the cheapest solution we found."

"When you purchase FireEye Network Security NX, will need to purchase a megabit per second package. You must know your needs from day one."

"When I compare this solution to its competitors in the market, I find that it is a little expensive."

"The pricing is fair, a little expensive, but fair. We've evaluated other products, and they're similarly priced."

"The user fee is not as high but the maintenance fee is expensive."

"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."

"It's an expensive solution."

"Because of what the FireEye product does, it has significantly decreased our mean time in being able to identify and detect malicious threats. The company that I work with is a very mature organization, and we have seen the meantime to analysis decrease by at least tenfold."

"The tool is a bit pricey."

More Trellix Network Detection and Response pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Network Detection and Response (NDR) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

10%

Insurance Company

Comms Service Provider

Government

Comms Service Provider

14%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	20
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Lumu?

Lumu protects against threats immediately and handles them in time.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Lumu?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Lumu?

We use it as our managed SOC instead of contracting with an MSP. It coordinates endpoint and gives us a single pane of glass for our security events.It fulfills the role of a SIEM, serving as our d...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Trellix Network Detection and Response is very great.

See all answers

What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?

I would like to see in Trellix Network Detection and Response more explanation about some details of the threat, and I wish it had more actions that you can take to contain the host or move it some...

See all answers

Comparisons

Darktrace vs Lumu

Compared 20% of the time

Wazuh vs Lumu

Compared 9% of the time

Stellar Cyber Open XDR vs Lumu

Compared 8% of the time

TrendAI Vision One vs Lumu

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Defender XDR vs Lumu

Compared 6% of the time

More Lumu Competitors

Fortinet FortiSandbox vs Trellix Network Detection and Response

Compared 7% of the time

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Trellix Network Detection and Response

Compared 6% of the time

Vectra AI vs Trellix Network Detection and Response

Compared 5% of the time

Darktrace vs Trellix Network Detection and Response

Compared 4% of the time

Zabbix vs Trellix Network Detection and Response

Compared 3% of the time

More Trellix Network Detection and Response Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Lumu

March 2026

Download Lumu product report

Buyer's Guide

Trellix Network Detection and Response

February 2026

Trellix Network Detection and Response report

Download Trellix Network Detection and Response product report

Also Known As

No data available

FireEye Network Security, FireEye

Overview

Lumu Technologies is a cyber-security company that illuminates threats, attacks, and adversaries affecting enterprises worldwide. Using actionable intelligence, Lumu provides a radical way to secure networks by enhancing and augmenting existing defense capabilities established over the past 25 years.

Lumu Technologies

Detect the undetectable and stop evasive attacks. Trellix Network Detection and Response (NDR) helps your team focus on real attacks, contain intrusions with speed and intelligence, and eliminate your cybersecurity weak points.

Trellix

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

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

Buyer's Guide

Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response

March 2026

Free Report: Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response

Find out what your peers are saying about Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Lumu vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response report.

See our list of best Network Detection and Response (NDR) vendors.

We monitor all Network Detection and Response (NDR) 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.