Compare Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. SentinelOne

Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews while SentinelOne is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6, while SentinelOne is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SentinelOne writes "AI-powered protection, data-rollback ability, and seamless integration with SolarWinds". Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike, whereas SentinelOne is most compared with Cylance, CrowdStrike and Carbon Black CB Defense. See our Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. SentinelOne report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. SentinelOne and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,374 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 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 »

It has the ability to rollback a ransomware infection instantly and with minimal disruption to the user & provides robust reporting.The solution offers very rich details surrounding threats or attacks.We have a preference for their receptor. It's good at finding many EFC files. EFC files could have a virus.The most valuable feature of this solution is the user-friendly interface.All of the features are valuable. The way that it integrates into management with fault correction capabilities over is especially valuable. Any of the full gamut of the features that it provides are useful to us.I have found the activity timeline and threat analysis to be particularly useful.In the past, we were not able to identify a few viruses, but now we are able to identify them because of the machine learning feature.It has good visibility features and it's straightforward.

Read more »

Cons
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 »

Set up is very labor-intensive.The solution needs better reporting on new threats and malware. The reporting is present, but I can't find the information easily.It's fine. It's correcting all the EFC files with a virus. All the achievements, maximum EFC files. Many EFC files will be flagged as a virus. Some virus databases need to be updated. The model is good at finding many EFC files. The trouble is it needs to be updated.This solution would be more attractive to customers if the price were lower.In terms of improvement, I would like to see better alerting to let us know if there is anything wrong with SentinelOne working on the endpoint of the computer.I would like to see something a little more sophisticated than simply being able to mark a false positive as safe or there's usually just one or two options in certain areas and they're a little rudimentary at this stage.The reporting needs improvement and I would like to see a more granular level of administrative privileges.There is not much flexibility in terms of policy fine-tuning. We can turn it off or turn it on, but, there's nothing much else to do. Everything is predefined. It's good in a way, but you don't get much flexibility if you want to do something particular.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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 »

The per-seat cost is low, but you have to commit to a certain number of licenses for a year.The price for it is very competitive compared to other Next Gen EPP.Spend money on the security for the endpoint.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
372,374 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
18,485
Comparisons
13,155
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
797
Avg. Rating
8.5
Views
17,372
Comparisons
11,676
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
369
Avg. Rating
8.4
Top Comparisons
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Also Known As
CyveraSentinel Labs
Learn
Palo Alto Networks
SentinelOne
Overview

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.

SentinelOne Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) unifies prevention, detection and response in a single platform driven by sophisticated machine learning and intelligent automation. It enables you to prevent and detect attacks across all major vectors, rapidly eliminate threats with fully automated, policy-driven response capabilities, and gain complete visibility into your endpoint environment with full-context, real-time forensics.

SentinelOne also offers Ransomware Cyber Guarantee, which is an opt-in program that provides SentinelOne Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) customers with financial support against demanded ransoms in the event an organization is infected with ransomware and EPP is unable to successfully block or remediate its effects.

Offer
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Learn more about SentinelOne
Sample Customers
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBankBOX, VISA, RKON, LCRA
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company22%
Mining And Metals Company22%
Government11%
Financial Services Firm11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company8%
Financial Services Firm7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Media Company11%
Comms Service Provider8%
Retailer8%
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. SentinelOne and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
372,374 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