No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs HP Wolf Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
117
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HP Wolf Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
3.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (45th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.6%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HP Wolf Security is 3.3%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.9%
HP Wolf Security3.3%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.6%
Other91.2%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Gained full visibility and streamlined threat detection through behavior-based insights and AI integration
Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth. We have fine-tuned our security policies and allowed different levels of policies to get rid of those false positives. Currently, we are getting a fairly good amount of incidents that are not false positives or benign, but actionable items. The process is streamlined. In the initial days, the operations used to get involved in a lot of benign and other activities, but now the process is streamlined. We are leveraging the auto-detection and remediation plans. The operations teams are now more involved in other business roles as well, not just looking into the logs and fetching out what's happening there. They have fixed a lot of things. Initially, they didn't have IAC code drift detection, cloud posture management, or security posture management, but they have those now. They purchased different vendors and did a merger with that. They have now Prisma Cloud that gets integrated and now they are working with Cortex Cloud. Everything that was negative has now been addressed, and the product altogether looks to be in a very better and mature shape now. Currently, it's more or less detecting the workloads with AI-based best practices. Since most organizations are consuming AI agents and other things, we are looking forward to seeing what other feature enhancements Palo Alto can support in that.
Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Operations Manager at Philips
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.
BH
Owner at Stoneridge Engineering, LLC
Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments
The tool's deployment is easy. HP Wolf Security's deployment was a swift process since it was initially compatible with Windows 10, the operating system on both machines. However, when I transitioned to Windows 11, I encountered minor issues that prompted me to delve deeper into Wolf Security to fine-tune security settings according to my preferences. While I mostly used default settings, there was an initial adjustment where I disabled the AI function related to malware. Currently, the system is running smoothly with no reported issues. Adjusting some settings raised concerns about compatibility between HP Wolf Security and Norton 360. Specifically, aspects of HP Wolf Security, such as the virtual machine component, intrigued me, but I hesitated due to potential conflicts. During my investigation, Windows 11 raised a flag, questioning the system's security settings with Norton 360 and HP Wolf Security. However, it seems that they coexist well without causing issues.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Cortex is the best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core."
"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."
"Cortex XDR is a very capable solution for protecting large networks and a lot of endpoints. It's very useful because the automation is very high, and if you combine it with the features on Palo Alto firewalls, it provides very strong protection."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"The main benefit of using Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks while employing Palo Alto Firewall at the internet edge is that it improves security on our endpoint devices, integrating seamlessly with Palo Alto Firewalls to deliver comprehensive network, analyst, and security details all in a single dashboard, which allows us to manage everything from our network devices."
"It does a good job of protecting us."
"​Very easy to deploy. It can be done one by one or deployed by customizing an MSI file for GPO push.​"
"Does malware analysis. Blocks WannaCry and other attacks that have come out."
"The quick installation would be the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions."
"Even if an endpoint loses connection to the Internet, I know that endpoint is protected against 99.99% of the threats in the wild today."
"One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"I use HP Wolf Security to add a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments."
"Bromium allows us to safely view images and quickly and safely surf our network so that we can take proper care of our patients efficiently, effectively, and expeditiously."
"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."
"Looking at it in the big picture of the risk that you're mitigating and the protection that you're getting, it's phenomenal."
"It has reduced the number of virus and malware incidents and calls we have received compared to prior to deploying this product, and our overall security posture has improved."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
 

Cons

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."
"A potential area of improvement for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the cost."
"The price could be a little lower."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a very good product, but financially, it is very expensive, so the company should look into that area."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"It is hard to manage."
"While you are working, you are finding these things that were supposed to be waived have come back to being blocked. That's frustrating."
"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"There are a lot of false positives and it takes up a lot of time."
"The initial setup was quite complicated, it took us a month or two with the reseller doing a good job assisting us with the initial configuration."
"I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line."
"I would say one thing that they might need to bring in is protection for mobile devices."
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability."
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability. It works well with attacks, but it doesn't work well with all software on the clients. There is a lot of troubleshooting and a lot of things that need to be tuned to make it work and not break things."
"When you deploy, not only is the user asked to reboot their computer, they are also asked to wait for 20 minutes while it sits there and initializes. It definitely impacts the end-user. It takes time away from their day."
"The tool behaves differently when I ported to Windows 11."
"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. We do mine the data that's in there from a forensics perspective... It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data. Reporting is absolutely the biggest shortcoming."
"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms. There are a lot of updates that come out for Microsoft Windows operating systems and the Bromium product needs to be able to keep up quickly with those updates and all the browser updates that are coming out. It's hard to do, but that's really where they need to be more responsive because we end up with problems and then we have to call support to get patches, etc."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"I feel it is fairly priced."
"The license price for this solution could be better. It's on the expensive side."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"It is expensive, but not unreasonable."
"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"We would just add more if there are new users, but right now you just need one license for per user."
"Currently, we have competitive pricing for Cylance, which is affordable enough to consider."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"The licensing part of the product is too expensive compared to other solutions in the market."
"The pricing is very fair compared to the competition. The licensing is straightforward."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"The product's pricing is a good value. We only run it on our internet-facing workstations, we don't run it on everything in our environment. We are very selective. Some organizations may want to consider doing something like that to reduce their license count."
"The product came as a bundle with the machine."
"I think the pricing is a good value. All of these security products are always going to be very expensive, but I don't think Bromium is unreasonable. I think Bromium is decently priced. It’s a tiered licensing platform. The more you buy, the cheaper gets per unit, and I think their tiers are very well defined. I think they're fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
910,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. Sentinel One
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. SentinelOne SentinelOne offers very detailed specifics with regard to risks or attacks. ...
Comparing CrowdStrike Falcon to Cortex XDR (Palo Alto)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Both Cortex XDR and Crowd Strike Falcon offer cloud-based solutions th...
How is Cortex XDR compared with Microsoft Defender?
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud-delivered endpoint security solution. The tool reduces the attack surface,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we conta...
What is your primary use case for Blackberry Protect?
I am using CylancePROTECT as an active learning algorithm. We installed it on almost 20,000 servers and virtual machi...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
Bromium vSentry
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Valspar
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. HP Wolf Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.