Compare Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Endgame

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 6th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 12 reviews while Endgame is ranked 33rd in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 2 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Endgame is rated 8.0. 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 Endgame writes "The system intelligence gives you good detail for creating intelligence reports". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and Microsoft Windows Defender, whereas Endgame is most compared with Carbon Black CB Defense, CrowdStrike and Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP). See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Endgame report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Use Endgame? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Endgame and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
407,538 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 »

The stability of the solution is good.The intelligence of the system has been very impressive. It's not quite AI, but the technical bit where it correlates information, based on the seen attacks within an organization is good.

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 »

The solution could offer better reporting features.The solution could also use better dashboards. They need to be more graphical, more matrix-like.

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 »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business solutions are best for your needs.
407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
19,082
Comparisons
13,640
Reviews
11
Average Words per Review
747
Avg. Rating
8.4
Views
1,670
Comparisons
1,462
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
430
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Also Known As
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Learn
Palo Alto Networks
Elastic
Video Not Available
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.

Endgame's converged endpoint security platform is transforming security programs - their people, processes and technology - with the most powerful endpoint protection and simplest user experience, ensuring analysts of any skill level can stop targeted attacks before information theft. Endgame unifies prevention, detection, and threat hunting to stop known and unknown attacker behaviors at scale with a single agent.

Offer
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Learn more about Endgame
Sample Customers
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBankTexas A&M, U.S. Air Force, NuScale Power, Martin's Point Health Care
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Mining And Metals Company22%
Healthcare Company22%
Media Company11%
Hospitality Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider15%
Construction Company6%
Retailer5%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Endgame and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
407,538 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.