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

ESET Inspect vs Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
51st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Trellix Endpoint Detection ...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 0.9%, down from 1.3% 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%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.5%
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.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
CESARCASTRO - PeerSpot reviewer
Committee Of IT Cybersececurity at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
Cross-site threat hunting has improved visibility and supports proactive incident response
I believe this is a product in evolution. I do not think it is a final tool to conduct forensics or information forensics of the incidents or information incidents that could arise in our network infrastructure. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is interesting and is a very good entry point that has been evolving through the last years. In the next two months, I have a new contract, and we are pointing out to have an XDR solution with NDR and EDR together. I do not have enough time to do it because I am the manager. However, my coworkers do not understand it yet. I have a contract with a third-party company that is making reports around that, but also they do not have enough experience or enough utility of this. It would be interesting if I have a notification system from EDR. For example, if I am the manager, it would be interesting to have a warning, alarm, or something around that which could call me to get into the system and the dashboard to see what is happening. For example, if it is a high-level threat. However, most of them are just advisory or warnings. I do not enter the tool frequently. I guess I access it once every three months.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management; Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very easy to work with, and we're quite happy with them."
"If any application performs suspicious activities, such as changing registries or modifying other applications, Cortex XDR detects and blocks the entire application."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"There are a lot of lead solutions in this space, however, Palo Alto is number one."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"The product has an intuitive dashboard."
"Technical support is the best in class, in my opinion, because they have invested heavily in research and development."
"It collects and caches and the knowledge of machine learning from different customers to take to the cloud, it makes it better to use for everybody, it allows for quick learning and updates and can, therefore, offer zero-day malware security, and this sharing of metadata helps make the solution very safe."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) has positively impacted my organization by improving visibility into security events on endpoints and servers, enabling the early detection of suspicious activities, reducing investigation times, and strengthening our monitoring processes and operational efficiency through analysis, Threat Hunting, and remote response."
"The dashboard makes it easier and more effective to analyze data."
"What we're using the most and what we found valuable in McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response are Web Control, Advanced Threat Protection, and Threat Prevention features."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"The biggest strength of the solution is that it's an integrated product that includes EDR and antivirus."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its area for threat detection."
"When Trellix detects some threats, the device is isolated in a quarantine zone for examination."
"The product provides a one-click recovery of encrypted files."
 

Cons

"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"I feel that it should not be a licensed activity because a feature should allow us to see applications running on end devices."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."
"Additionally, I think the price is very high, and if it can be adjusted, I believe it will be a very good solution."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The console has a lot of bugs, and it creates many issues."
"One of the issues about the product stems from the failure to work on its administrative scalability. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement."
"For Spanish users, it is necessary to have a knowledge base specifically designed for them, which is currently not available."
"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."
"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."
"I remember doing many tickets for Trellix support, and my EDR was not properly functioning. I didn't feel the detection or the real protection."
"The dashboard is split across different platforms. For example, if you want information on Incident Detection, you have to access one dashboard, and for DLP reporting, there's a separate platform. This fragmentation means you can't access everything from a single dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"This is an expensive solution."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Very costly product."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The price is reasonable."
"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."
"The product’s pricing 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."
"Speaking about the price, you must use the product to find the product's cost for you."
"The cost is okay, compared to other products."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise56
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
My experience with pricing, implementation costs and platform licensing has been positive. The solution offers a robu...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
Although Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) offers those detection, investigation and response capabilitie...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response?
The main use case for Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) in my organization is for continuous monitoring o...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
McAfee MVISION EDR, MVISION EDR, MVISION Endpoint Detection and Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Sutherland Global Services
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Trellix Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.