We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and CylancePROTECT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Fortinet FortiEDR made our clients feel secure and more at ease, knowing that they had an EDR solution that would close the gap in their security posture."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"They did what they said. This solution could apply to any scenario."
"Endpoints are protected in real-time without the need of a centralized server."
"It does a good job of protecting us."
"It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions."
"Its setup is simple if you have a Windows device; it is executable."
"What I like best about CylancePROTECT is its accuracy, as it doesn't give many false positives."
"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"Two or three years ago when the WannaCry virus struck, the people that were on Cylance were the ones that weren't affected."
"The solution is pretty easy to scale."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Detections could be improved."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"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 server sometimes stops continuously to check things so it would be helpful to receive access updates or technical reasons."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"The solution should implement AI in the product."
"I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line."
"It's a good solution but some features just need to be updated."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics. A little bit more would be nice."
"It is hard to manage."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while CylancePROTECT is ranked 23rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 41 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while CylancePROTECT is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CylancePROTECT writes "Ensures advanced AI-driven threat detection to provide robust endpoint security, effectively preventing both known and unknown threats with minimal impact on system performance". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas CylancePROTECT is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, Trellix Endpoint Security and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. CylancePROTECT report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.