Compare CrowdStrike vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

CrowdStrike is ranked 7th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 10 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. CrowdStrike is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike writes "I like the overall reports of this solution. They are crisp, and to the point". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". CrowdStrike is most compared with Cylance, Microsoft Windows Defender and Carbon Black CB Defense, whereas Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike. See our CrowdStrike vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,185 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
This solution has made the lives of the IT staff much easier, compared to the previous one.We are now able to find the root cause analysis on any threat. We can figure out where the issue came in versus just dealing with where it is at the moment.We have seen a reduction to the performance hit to our operating systems.We are happy with CloudStrike's ease of use and touch notification.Because it is security product and acts like an AIML smart product, not merely based on daily/weekly updates and signatures.The automatic alert feature is the most important feature of the solution.The most valuable feature is its threat analysis.Scalability is good. We have had no issues with it.

Read more »

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.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to see the machine learning feature enhanced.As the company has grown, the technical support has felt less personal.The GUI can use improvement, it's cloud-based so sometimes the interface can be a bit slow. The interface could use a little bit more speed.We have had to open a case with the technical support to get some issues and bugs resolved.Unfortunately, native applications are not supported.The management of log aggregation is in need of improvement.I would like CrowdStrike to provide some correlation in the threat analysis, so we can visualize things better.Whenever there is a feature release (upgrade) where we push to all the endpoints, it causes something to be blocked without us knowing.

Read more »

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.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
This solution has a very competitive price.We are at about $60,000 per year.The other administrator and I can log in to check the exact details of what happened, what was running, and what caused the detection. We know exactly what was happening on the end users PC and we can tell if it's something that we actually need or something that's malicious.I do not have experience with the cost or licensing of the product.I would like them to further reduce the price, because it is quite pricey at the moment.Purchasing the product through the AWS Marketplace is just a click away. Since we were using the on-premise version of the product, we continued on the cloud by purchasing it through the AWS Marketplace.The pricing will depend upon your volume of usage.

Read more »

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.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
372,185 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
27,028
Comparisons
20,135
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
397
Avg. Rating
8.6
Views
18,485
Comparisons
13,155
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
797
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Also Known As
Cyvera
Learn
CrowdStrike
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

Falcon sensor (small and light) and cloud (big and powerful) work seamlessly to deliver real-time protection and visibility -- yes, even when the sensor is not connected to the internet. The simplicity of CrowdStrike’s architecture finally gives you the freedom to replace and retire the complicated, performance-robbing security layers that clutter your environment.

This architecture lies at the heart of Falcon, CrowdStrike’s pioneering cloud-delivered endpoint protection platform. It both delivers and unifies next-generation antivirus, endpoint detection and response (EDR), managed threat hunting, security hygiene and threat intelligence. Using its purpose-built cloud native architecture, the Falcon Platform collects and analyzes more than 30 billion endpoint events per day from millions of sensors deployed across 176 countries.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about CrowdStrike
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
Rackspace Inc.CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Manufacturing Company9%
Financial Services Firm8%
Retailer7%
REVIEWERS
Mining And Metals Company22%
Healthcare Company22%
Media Company11%
Hospitality Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company24%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company8%
Financial Services Firm7%
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,185 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all 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.
Sign Up with Email