We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Webroot Business Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"Auto-Remediation"
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."
"Their policy management, their cloud-based dashboard and user interface are very easy to navigate."
"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."
"It is very light. It is the only solution that can be installed on a machine that already has an antivirus. It is a pretty complete solution."
"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."
"The ease of use of the centralized admin console is its best asset."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The solution is not stable."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"Since they're dealing with multi-core environments now, the best option would be for them to enhance the product so that the product can automatically do an assessment on the machine."
"I believe that Webroot Business Endpoint Protection should offer a more modern UI."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"I did notice that my OS slowed down, but I don't know if that's due to Webroot."
"The solution could improve by providing better ransomware protection."
"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."
"I'm not happy with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, for only one reason. It seems that it slows down my interface when I'm doing programming in Microsoft Access, tremendously."
"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Webroot Business Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 80 reviews while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is ranked 35th in EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) with 30 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "It provides a whole new level of visibility and integrates with most other vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection writes "Lightweight and not hard to set up however, does not offer good reporting". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Microsoft Defender for Cloud, whereas Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Huntress, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cynet. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Webroot Business Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best EPP (Endpoint Protection for Business) vendors.
We monitor all EPP (Endpoint Protection 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.