We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"This is stable and scalable."
"It is stable and scalable."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable. It is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"The dashboard is customizable."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core."
"We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for."
"WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is a reliable solution."
"The basic functionality is fantastic. It has been performing well. I generated a report on one machine, using that as the deployment machine. When scanning the network, it discovered machines on the network and deployed the same endpoint protection from that one machine I have on my network."
"The protection that it provides from ransomware is valuable. The awareness that it has is also valuable. It didn't have a central console earlier, but now it has a central console, which is pretty good."
"When you download the executable file from the internet, it automatically sandboxes to make sure it's not doing anything incorrectly."
"The most valuable feature, in my opinion, is the dimension logging platform and the network traffic filtering."
"I like WatchGuard's network segmentation features. It's easy to configure user policies."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation of logs from different devices."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"Detections could be improved."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"The support needs improvement."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"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."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"The solution is a bit confusing and there are unusual complications with setup."
"When it comes to live-monitoring, the user-interface could be improved to make things easier."
"The administrative UI/UX could be significantly improved."
"This product needs to be fully integrated with the firewall. Currently, it only sends logs to the cloud and asks the firewall to correlate them."
"The interface is not the best."
"WatchGuard should offer more visibility into user activity. For example, we should have more details when WatchGuard denies a user access to a port."
"The reporting isn't so good. If they worked to improve this aspect of the solution, it would be much stronger."
"The website must provide more information on the product."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is ranked 27th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 12 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is rated 8.2. 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 WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response writes "Offers deployment simplicity, especially for firewalls and firewall configuration and good documentation available ". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Trend Vision One, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Bitdefender GravityZone EDR. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. WatchGuard Threat Detection and Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.