We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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."Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"Since they've done their most recent update, the ease to isolate endpoints is valuable. If we find one where there is a virus on it, we can easily isolate it. We don't even have to contact the user. We don't have to manually take them off the network. We can easily isolate them."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the capability of the command used by the machine so that we see the kind of performance that is running."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"The solution is efficient."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"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."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"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."
"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"Ad hoc higher-level reporting to senior management can be improved or can be implemented. That's definitely an area of improvement that they need to focus on."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 19 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response 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 Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response writes "It has helped us become more knowledgeable about our environment and aware of threats". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace and Symantec Endpoint Security, whereas Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.