No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

N-able EDR vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
N-able EDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Detection ...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of N-able EDR is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is 0.9%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.7%
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)0.9%
N-able EDR0.6%
Other94.8%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
NM
Senior Operations Specialist at Tagit cc
Reporting effectiveness and advanced AI capabilities improve threat awareness while needing pricing simplification and licensing self-service
With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process. If they could bundle it as one solution and show the capabilities or features, they would be able to sell it more effectively, and as resellers, we could sell it to customers more easily. The technical support is responsive, but sometimes we experience limitations regarding the ability to add licensing. They could implement a self-service platform for assigning new licenses or ordering more. Currently, we depend on contacting someone who sends a new contract to sign through the process. They could change their licensing model, though I am not the right person to comment on functionality. On the reporting side, everything is covered.
Duncan  Kims - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Advanced detection has reduced targeted attacks and builds daily confidence in our defenses
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has a very low false positive rate compared to other products, thus increasing the SOC efficiency in how my team relies on the solution day-to-day.With the best features Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers, ease of SOAR integration helps to automate the IOC distribution, and our security team and management trust the product. Advanced detection capabilities ensure that targeted attacks will be detected and blocked before they arrive at our network. SOAR integration has assisted our security team and management in trusting the product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is specifically designed to prevent zero-day attacks and is part of an ecosystem of Palo Alto, providing customers with a long-term vision to modify and redesign how security is applied in their company."
"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"I like that the product has behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"Its ability to react to cyber data attacks is awesome."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"The most valuable feature, which I can describe as the '360 vision' of the inventory device, provides a complete view of all the devices."
"The most valuable features are the rollback feature, it's important for us. The AI models and are good."
"We have been using this solution for quite some time, and the AI functionality is quite advanced; we are able to provide insights on different aspects and read the reports easily."
"It provides visibility and a storyline to track the virus or malware's activities, showing infected processes and changes made."
"It has been helpful in terms of identifying unknown threats."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...I rate the solution's technical support team a nine and a half or ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the ability to isolate or quarantine devices and block or detect Ransomware and other well-known tools that are used to exploit vulnerabilities on devices."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The most useful features are behavior monitoring, DLP, and access control. The automation has gotten much better in the last two years than when it was McAfee. It works better now and integrates more smoothly."
"My advice for others considering Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is to use it, or any other Trellix products, as I believe they are excellent."
"The most valuable feature I found in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is the guided analytics or guided EDR investigation."
 

Cons

"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"They are charging for Network Traffic Analyzer (NTA) services, so if the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better."
"Basically, they don't provide customer support tools just to investigate the logs."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"The onboarding process could be better."
"I have faced some issues with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks; there is room for improvement in the sense that certain options prevent us from seeing and segregating data."
"If Palo Alto reduces the pricing slightly for their products, it would make them more scalable in markets such as India and globally for cybersecurity."
"I would rate the scalability as seven out of ten. The capability is useful. Concerning the license, if I add one more device without a license, it will automatically subscribe to a license. I do not appreciate that."
"With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process."
"I would like to see them add support for both Android and iOS smartphones."
"We have a lot of false positives we see in the dashboard. I think this is the only problem we are facing."
"Trellix does not support Linux and Mac."
"Initially, I was using it on servers, but it consumes a lot of resources on servers."
"The alert feature of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response needs improvement because for you to get the alerts, you have to log on to the portal. What my company needs is a tool that sends you alerts. For example, if it detects a threat on your machine, it should send you an alert. My company gets the alerts instead from the antivirus software rather than the EDR. If you want to see the alerts on McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, you have to connect to the system manually. Another area for improvement in the tool is the reporting. My company needs weekly and monthly reports about the alerts, but you can't extract reports from McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response, so a decision was made to move to another EDR solution, particularly Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, next month. My company tested Microsoft Defender for Endpoint via a POC for one to three months. The resource usage of McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is also an area for improvement because it consumes a lot of memory. For example, during the on-demand scan, you can't work because of the high CPU usage. You need to schedule the scans. McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response has a lot of modules, but my company doesn't use all modules."
"This is the worst technical support. Without OEM support, you can't handle this product."
"I also think performance needs improvement, especially for servers, as the Trellix HX module uses high CPU, scans constantly, and negatively impacts the performance for our clients' users or our servers."
"The dashboard and reporting features are not so user-friendly or intuitive, so they need some work."
"The solution's downside stems from the fact that Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and McAfee MVISION Endpoint are not combined into a single solution, so from an improvement perspective, they need to be combined into a single solution."
"Some modules that are doing machine learning and artificial intelligence are blocking our processes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The pricing is average."
"Pricing is a problem in South Africa. It could be cheaper here. The rand-to-dollar exchange rate makes it expensive for us. A 25 dollar endpoint cost becomes quite significant when converted to rand."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"The price is reasonable."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is reasonable in terms of cost. It's a tool my company has been using for a few years now. It costs $25,000 to $30,000 for six hundred users."
"The pricing is always high."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is high, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response is not that expensive, but it's not something that a startup could buy. Pricing for it is for midsized businesses. There's an additional payment if you want data retention for more than thirty days. They gave us data retention for thirty days. Then if you want longer data retention, they have the paid option for a three-month data retention period and for a one-year data retention period."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Transportation Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What needs improvement with N-able EDR?
With pricing, they can improve by bundling their pricing because sometimes billing comes in a very long process. If t...
What is your primary use case for N-able EDR?
We are using N-able EDR, but I think Sophos makes sense because of the environment we operate in. The localization an...
What advice do you have for others considering N-able EDR?
I am more focused on operations and procurement. The decision to use this solution was made before I joined the compa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
I find licensing to be one of the best aspects of Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR), but I am unsure abou...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) could be improved as I find that, since FireEye and McAfee became Trell...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
My main use case for Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is for blocking malware and catching unusual behav...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Sutherland Global Services
Find out what your peers are saying about N-able EDR vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.