Compare Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos EPP Suite

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 15 reviews while Sophos EPP Suite is ranked 13th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 13 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.2, while Sophos EPP Suite 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 Sophos EPP Suite writes "Stops infections from spreading around an internal network even after the problems have infiltrated it". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec End-user Endpoint Security, Microsoft Windows Defender, Carbon Black CB Defense and ESET Endpoint Security, whereas Sophos EPP Suite is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Trend Micro Deep Security, CylancePROTECT, Carbon Black CB Defense and McAfee Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos EPP Suite 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. Sophos EPP Suite and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
430,988 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
The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems.If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that.The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious.Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP.The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it.One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature. It doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taken their laptops home. You don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work. AMP will work anywhere in the world, as long as it has an Internet connection. You get protection and reporting with it. No matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it. You still have the ability to manage and remediate things. The cloud feature is the magic bullet. This is what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned.Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us.Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations.

More Cisco AMP for Endpoints Pros »

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.They have a new GUI which is just fantastic.The most valuable for us is the correlation feature.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.

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pros »

The most valuable feature is data loss prevention.The solution's most valuable aspect, for us, is the DLP portion of the product.The anti-malware and web filtering are the solutions most valuable aspects.The central management of the anti-virus features for our end user is a very valuable aspect of the solutions.Sophos EPP Suite has the capability to stop infections from spreading around the internal network even after the problems have infiltrated it.In terms of the Firewall, the EAP assist, the simple interface and the reporting features are quite good for clients. It's very easy to understand and to navigate the Dashboard.With Sophos, the scanning of viruses and scanning of the disk is done silently in the background.The most valuable feature is the ability to centrally manage the total security environment, including the firewall.

More Sophos EPP Suite Pros »

Cons
The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time....the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal.The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself.The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on.We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment.The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications.Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that.I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products.

More Cisco AMP for Endpoints Cons »

The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements.There's an overall lack of features.There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved.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.

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Cons »

If we could bypass the first couple of levels of support when we have a problem then it would be easier and quicker when we need an issue resolved.The solution has a strange technical support process where you need to move through all of these tiers before you can get to someone who can help you. They should streamline the process and make it easier to speak to the correct level of support from the outset.The solution isn't quite accurate enough. It provides a lot of false positives.The management console need improvement.Sophos does not currently inform users of potential compatability issues with Windows updates.The support could be improved. The response times are slow.The solution is not easy to use in comparison to other endpoint security solutions.I would like to have more logging features to help more deeply analyze traffic.

More Sophos EPP Suite Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing.There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it.We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work.The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable.We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds.Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection.There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization.Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc.

More Cisco AMP for Endpoints 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.

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice »

We purchased a three-year license, which gave us a large discount.It may be possible to negotiate licensing cost based on volume.The pricing for this solution is ok.Willing to discount when you are switching from another product. Upgrading services will end up costing more, as expected.

More Sophos EPP Suite Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business solutions are best for your needs.
430,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Popular Comparisons
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks TrapsEPP Suite
Learn
Cisco
Palo Alto Networks
Sophos
Overview

Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.

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.

Protect every user and every device from malware, spam, data loss and more with our Enduser Protection bundles. Only Sophos delivers best-of-breed endpoint, mobile, encryption, email and web security solutions licensed per user and backed by the best support in the industry.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Learn more about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks
Learn more about Sophos EPP Suite
Sample Customers
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial BankCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBankEK Services
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company23%
Government15%
Comms Service Provider8%
Construction Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider25%
Government7%
Construction Company6%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company18%
Mining And Metals Company18%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company7%
Construction Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company36%
Comms Service Provider11%
Construction Company7%
Media Company6%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Sophos EPP Suite and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
430,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business vendors.

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.