We performed a comparison between Cynet and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cynet offers strong ransomware protection and an intuitive interface. Cortex XDR presents an intuitive interface, advanced identification of risks, expandability, and compatibility with various other solutions. Cynet needs to expand device support and add customization options. Users suggest improving network monitoring and strengthening integration with other tools. Cortex XDR could use enhancements in hard disk encryption, security integration, and customer education.
Service and Support: Cynet's customer service is consistently lauded for its excellence. They have a dedicated support team that is available round the clock, and they also have a contingency plan for urgent incidents. Some customers were impressed with Palo Alto support, while others reported mixed experiences.
Ease of Deployment: Cynet’s setup is highly efficient, with the ability to configure thousands of devices quickly. Some users thought Cortex XDR’s deployment was fast and straightforward, while others consider it to be a complex and time-consuming task that requires thorough planning.
Pricing: Customers generally view Cynet's pricing and licensing experience as affordable and a good value for its features. Some reviewers said Cortex XDR is expensive, but others said it was reasonable for the robust feature set Cortex offers.
ROI: Cynet yields an excellent ROI by preventing cyberattacks and safeguarding sensitive data. Cortex XDR creates value by ensuring system and data security rather than a financial return on investment.
Comparison Results: Our users favor Cynet over Cortex XDR. Cynet offers an all-encompassing cybersecurity solution, equipped with cutting-edge ransomware detection, protection against threats, SOC monitoring, and an easily navigable interface. Users praise Cynet for its swift and customized setup process tailored to individual customer requirements. Cortex XDR receives varying opinions regarding its initial setup, pricing, and customer support, with some users finding it complex and costly.
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"The integration between all the Defender products is the most valuable feature."
"Email protection is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender XDR."
"Advanced hunting is good. I like that. We can drill down to lots of details."
"It has been great for us. Previously, we didn't have a solution to protect us, especially from malware, whereas now, we are getting protection up front, especially from the malware attacks coming through emails or endpoints."
"All of the security components are valuable including, antiphishing, antispam, and stage three antivirus."
"The attack simulation is excellent; initially, this feature wasn't very robust, but Microsoft improved what we could achieve with it. We can now customize our practice phishing emails and include our company logo, for example. Attack simulation also helps integrate with third-party solutions where applicable and provides an overview of our security architecture through testing. The summary includes areas for improvement in our protection and what steps we need to take to get there."
"We also use Microsoft Sentinel, Defender for Cloud, Defender for Identity, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps. They are all integrated and it was very easy to integrate them. In my experience with the integrations, it was just a click of a button and things were integrated. It's just a button."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"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. This sharing of metadata helps make the solution very safe."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"Cynet's most valuable features are laptop and server performance, internal network monitoring, and external firewall lock management."
"The interface is exceptionally clear and easy to understand."
"The initial setup is very fast and very easy."
"The feature I find most valuable, is the reality graphical user interface."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the network part of it because most of the endpoint products in XDS products we find Cynet has networking user behavior analysis and network analysis, for the whole team."
"A reliable security system that automatically quarantines anything suspicious."
"This solution requires less management and is very easy to use."
"We are using almost all of the features and we find it quite good overall."
"There should be better information for experts on features in the solution. What I see when reading about features in Microsoft 365 Defender is that it is always general information. If Microsoft could go deeper into details for the experts about how to use the tools, usage of it would be more familiar and it would be easier to use."
"While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience."
"One of the biggest downsides of Microsoft products, in general, is that the menus are often difficult to find, as they tend to move from place to place between versions."
"Advanced attacks could use an improvement."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"In the beginning, it's difficult to navigate the system because it is quite large. Just trying to find your way and understand how the system works can be hard. After spending quite a lot of time searching it's a lot easier, but I wish it were a bit more user-friendly when you're trying to find things."
"The management and automation of the cloud apps have room for improvement."
"The design of the user interface could use some work. Sometimes it's hard to find the exact information you need."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere."
"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"Most of their times are in Greenwich Mean Time. I would like to see more local time zones."
"Automation could be improved, and orchestration could be added to the features."
"We'd like something that makes it easier to manage specific points."
"Increased application for SOAR abilities across interconnected devices would be a welcome improvement."
"In future releases, I would like to see cloud security aspects included."
"The reporting functionality in Cynet may not be as comprehensive or flexible as desired."
"The inability to add contact information inside the Cynet is also an issue because it makes things more complicated. I would like to have a simple feature to enter a contact name and number for the person taking care of that unit or that server."
"Cynet fails to deploy the same technology in mobile devices."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 80 reviews while Cynet is ranked 9th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 35 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Cynet is rated 8.8. 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 Cynet writes "Provides memory protection, device control, and vulnerability management". 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 Cynet is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Stellar Cyber Open XDR. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cynet report.
See our list of best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors, best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors, and best Ransomware Protection vendors.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) 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.
