Compare Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. CylancePROTECT

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 12 reviews while CylancePROTECT is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 8 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while CylancePROTECT is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Proactive AI-based security that scales as we need it". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec End-user Endpoint Security and Microsoft Windows Defender, whereas CylancePROTECT is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Carbon Black CB Defense and SentinelOne. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. CylancePROTECT report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. CylancePROTECT and other solutions. Updated: May 2020.
420,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
WildFire AI is the best option for this product.The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week.It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core.We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.

Read more »

Has good RAM capacity for the power I needTwo or three years ago when the WannaCry virus struck, the people that were on Cylance were the ones that weren't affected.The Application Guard and ByteGuard are useful features.The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well.On the management side, we liked the way it displays things.The solution is stable.The solution is pretty easy to scale.It handles situations that the other threat management tools wouldn't find. It has worked well covering the weaker sides of the other products that we're integrating.

Read more »

Cons
The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results.It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports.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.Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.

Read more »

It should have better support for Windows and Mac.I would like to see them fix the alerting system so that the endpoint reporting is a bit more streamlined.The OPTICS component could be made more user-friendly with respect to giving people more information.I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices.It should provide more details about the events that they have detected.The solution needs better dashboards that are easier to use.The security scripting needs improvement. It needs deeper security for scripting.I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
This is an expensive solution.The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.

Read more »

The monthly fee is $55 USD per user.I think that the price we are paying is good for what it is.We would just add more if there are new users, but right now you just need one license for per user.Our licensing cost for the solution is around $4,000 for six months. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business solutions are best for your needs.
420,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
20,279
Comparisons
14,506
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
747
Avg. Rating
8.4
Views
31,196
Comparisons
25,351
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
452
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Learn
Palo Alto Networks
Cylance
Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the world's first detection and response app that natively integrates network, endpoint and cloud data to stop sophisticated attacks. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks accurately detects threats with behavioral analytics and reveals the root cause to speed up investigations.

Cylance® is revolutionizing cybersecurity with products and services that proactively prevent, rather than reactively detect the execution of advanced persistent threats and malware. Our technology is deployed on over four million endpoints and protects hundreds of enterprise clients worldwide including Fortune 100 organizations and government institutions.

Offer
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Learn more about CylancePROTECT
Sample Customers
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBankPanasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company22%
Mining And Metals Company22%
Financial Services Firm11%
Government11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider13%
Construction Company7%
Media Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Comms Service Provider9%
Government6%
Media Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business43%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise35%
Large Enterprise50%
REVIEWERS
Small Business69%
Large Enterprise31%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. CylancePROTECT and other solutions. Updated: May 2020.
420,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business 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.