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

Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response vs Trellix Endpoint Security Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 9, 2025

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

Symantec Endpoint Detection...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Security P...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
158
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (9th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security Platform is 4.3%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

YusufAhmed - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use and competitively priced
Honestly, the product needs to continue the way it is, and I feel that everything will be fine. I haven't had any reasons to complain about the product. The product doesn’t offer MDM functionality under its current licensing model. In the future, I want the product to offer MDM. It can allow me to manage my mobile device more efficiently and effectively. Currently, there is a need for a separate license to be added to Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response to be able to use the MDM part. If both are bundled up under the same license, the administration part can be made easier.
Abdullah Al Hadi - PeerSpot reviewer
Customization capabilities allow clients to autonomously deploy policies
There are a few areas where Trellix Endpoint Security ( /categories/endpoint-protection-platform-epp ) can improve. Firstly, the high CPU utilization when agents are installed can negatively impact client systems. Another issue is with end-users outside the network, where the agent handler sometimes fails to deploy the product properly. Improvements are needed in forensic analytics to detect specific vulnerabilities. It would also help if detection specifics were identified more quickly and the problem-solving process accelerated, especially to meet larger clients' expectations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is its ability to conduct large scans on the endpoints without affecting the network."
"It is mostly used for malware detection and antivirus purposes."
"The solution is scalable."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is stable."
"In Symantec, we have found that the most important feature is Application and Device Control."
"The most valuable features of the solution are that it is easy to use and has good support."
"The pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The solution can scale well."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"I recommend Trellix Endpoint Security to others as it seems like one of the industry standards and is fairly stable."
"The solution includes a good combination of features for both signature and signature-less."
"When Intel acquired McAfee they worked on the protocol so that all vendors can work on the same platform. It's a very big improvement in McAfee. All McAfee products talk to each other. Other vendor's products can join this platform as well so it makes it more powerful on the enterprise side for McAfee."
"It also allows multifunctionality within a single platform."
"The threat scanning is excellent. It uses predictive technology and I can utilize attack data to help us fine-tune our systems and network infrastructure. This protects us against current and future attacks."
"McAfee MVISION Endpoint is stable."
 

Cons

"In the future, it would be nice to have playbooks in the tool, to allow for some of the common activities to be automated. For example, some of the scannings of the malware can be too manual for a specific device. Additionally, a vulnerability manager would be beneficial."
"One potential area for improvement in Symantec EDR is the reporting engine."
"While they are quite dynamic, they need to ensure they are detecting threats faster in the future to keep people safer."
"They need to improve their cloud presence."
"That's why I wouldn't recommend it for other systems. It works only with SAP clients. That's why I'm giving it a six. It would get higher if it worked on all networks without the help of SAP."
"It would be beneficial to have more integration and compatibility with other platforms."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response could improve the reporting. It is very difficult to create reports from the user interface."
"The solution can always be more stable and more secure."
"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."
"The local technical support could be better."
"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."
"They could provide better integration capabilities for the product with other services."
"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 customization capabilities of the solution are an area where it lacks, so it would be great if our company could customize the solution to meet the demands of our customers."
"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."
"Search feature could be made more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay around $100,000 for 5000 licenses every year."
"The price is really high and it should be lower."
"The price is okay, but it really depends on the customer's requirements."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is expensive."
"The more devices we have the more expensive it becomes, which is where the challenge is."
"Compared to the tools of competitors, Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response is a cheaply priced product."
"Of late, because of the Broadcom purchase, its price has been increasing."
"The price of the solution is fair, we have a complete security package."
"I rate Trellix Endpoint Security a nine out of ten for pricing."
"The price of McAfee is pretty similar to Symantec, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"This product is costly."
"There is a one-year and a three-year license available for this solution, we are currently on a three-year license."
"Since the maintenance is done by our own team, the price of the subscription should really be cheaper."
"The tool is affordable"
"It was an annual fee. There was just one overall fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
8%
Educational Organization
14%
Government
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response?
I am not aware of the pricing details, as that falls under the management's responsibility.
What needs improvement with Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response?
There are several areas where Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response can improve, including shell features, web control, asset management, and device control. Specifically, the application contro...
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 Endpoint Security?
It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts.
 

Also Known As

No data available
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Symantec Endpoint Detection and Response vs. Trellix Endpoint Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.