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

Trellix Endpoint Security vs Webroot Business Endpoint Protection comparison

 

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

Trellix Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th)
Webroot Business Endpoint P...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
42nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security is 2.8%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Rick Cassel - PeerSpot reviewer
Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting
We've had a couple of events both this year and last year where it just didn't seem to catch ransomware, which is impossible to do if someone has hands-on with the system. There were some things that they had or used to have or don't have that I still haven't figured out called journaling. And it was supposed to be a way to roll back changes that were made. However, they're telling me they don't have that. That's not in the system. It’s my understanding that it doesn’t actually scan any files at all. They just look at their database of files they've scanned previously, and either it matches or doesn't. That might be where the shortcoming is, is that it just can't stay up-to-date fast enough to stop new things that are coming in. It's an after-the-fact anti-virus. It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it. There is one thing that is deplorable with the product that I would change as soon as I found a better one. However, the reports are worthless. You go and look at a scan report and cannot get a log of machines. I can log into a console and see the files were scanned every day at 2:00 AM, and they all passed green or something was detected and removed. However, you have to go to the console. I don't have anything that I can send to my client on reports. What they give you is a bunch of bar graphs with no details. You can't drill down. It'll say two infections. However, it doesn't tell you what machines. You've just really got several different reports, and they're all just a bunch of graphs and wasted paper. There's nothing really substantial. The reports that I can use for client-facing, once a month, to say, "Here, we scanned all these workstations. Here are our results," don’t exist. They've got fake reports. I've screamed about that for years, and they just won't do anything. Therefore, I created my own little up-to-date or not ask fail-type report. I send that to them in place of a report directly from a product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Dynamic Application Containment."
"The product is quite user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are the prevention layer that detects the signature value and prevents threats in the network."
"Technical support is always available and very helpful."
"The most valuable features are the adaptive tech on McAfee."
"The solution provides a data view of the Alpha systems with Trellix installs and makes small changes to the central management console. Nothing on the endpoints themselves works, but it focuses more on the management side."
"I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to manage the solution from anywhere and having an overview of the companies security."
"It is a stable solution...The solution's technical support is good."
"The main reason we had Webroot is that it was cost-effective for our clients."
"It is excellent endpoint protection for mobiles that does everything it says it will."
"Webroot's tech support is pretty good; they've given me some pointers."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It took five minutes. I installed the solution myself."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"It is very light. It is the only solution that can be installed on a machine that already has an antivirus. It is a pretty complete solution."
"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."
"The traffic security monitoring, traffic application access feature called the agent, the main feature which is the endpoint security feature are the ones I found valuable. And it also had the in branch security in kind of SD WAN, good three hundred and sixty protection. It is specific and there is ease of deployment also present."
 

Cons

"We’re facing remote installation issues sometimes:"
"Some agents become old and then they don't communicate well any longer."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"The tool could provide more advanced protection."
"The DAC (Dynamic Application Containment) component of this product needs improvement."
"It can be quite complicated to learn McAfee Endpoint Security and to feel comfortable with the environment."
"An area in need of improvement involves the overview, which usually does not enable one to get the value in reports."
"Every time we open a ticket with McAfee, their response differs and they are not consistent."
"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."
"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"We need more control over when upgrades to the app are rolled out."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"There should be a Webroot Business Endpoint Protection mobile app."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"McAfee's prices are flexible and can be quite competitive, although there are other solutions that are even more so."
"The license costs are very reasonable, around 1,000 to 1,200 rupees per year."
"Trellix may cost around $46 to $47 for a single license without an EDR."
"We pay for the license on an annual basis."
"There are some extra expenses for using the product, in addition to licensing related to the maintenance of the product."
"It's fairly priced compared to other products on the market."
"The product is expensive."
"I am happy with the pricing."
"From a pricing standpoint, I would rate it a four out of five."
"Work on a price tier plan."
"It is relatively cheap."
"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."
"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."
"The solution is pretty cheap, actually. At our level, which is at 2,500 endpoints, we're paying 87 cents an agent per month."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."
"With Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, I can select a yearly billing cycle."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
40%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Real Estate/Law Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
Trellix Endpoint Security is cost-effective and provides excellent value for money, with no need for extra expenses for premium support.
What do you like most about Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.
What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?
Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.
 

Also Known As

McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Mytech Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Trellix Endpoint Security vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.