We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Fortinet FortiClient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"Starting from FortiGate and from the EMS server, you have to begin at the endpoint, and that's the most useful thing about using FortiClient."
"The product is user-friendly."
"It works well and the performance is good."
"It is a fantastic product. Its overall security is valuable. We are very impressed with the web filtering and the application firewall it provides."
"Fortinet FortiClient's scalability is very good because it has no limitations."
"Having a centralized console is a valuable feature. The Fortinet fabric is also very valuable where all different pieces talk together to secure our network and track the North, South, East, and West movement of files and data through our network."
"Fortinet FortiClient offers a vulnerability test feature, allowing us to monitor end-user devices. This includes ensuring necessary updates, such as Windows updates, are not overlooked."
"It's easy to use, easy to deploy, and I have more visibility over my network that shows which users are connected to the firewalls, which users are connected to the network, and what they're accessing."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"If they had pulse rate detection, it would be better."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"The licensing model is complex to understand. It requires expertise to explain how the licensing works. You need expertise to guide you through the subscription plan."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"With Fortinet, some clients have to wait two to four days for a response. That is the biggest complaint from end customer about Fortinet's technical support."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the connection because sometimes it drops."
"The product's performance and pricing could be better."
"We would like Fortinet to add the function or the possibility to use all FortiClient features for free."
"The solution has some issues with stability on the user side."
"We'd like to be able to properly encrypt the data more effectively."
"While I cannot think of new features to add, it would be nice if the reports were improved, to have these sent automatically."
"Technical support needs to determine priority level based on the cases rather than the support package bundle."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.