We performed a comparison between Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Because Check Point Harmony can require more resources to run, making Cortex XDR the ultimate winner in this comparison.
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"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."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"We love the reports and monitoring they provide."
"The rollout and management of devices were very simple."
"The most valuable feature is Harmony Endpoint's encapsulation system which captures the whole system and protects it against other functions. It is really good for the Check Point Harmony specialists."
"It's a scalable product as it is a cloud offering."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It's easy to scale as needed."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the VPN."
"It has extended OS support to ensure your legacy endpoints also have zero-day protection."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"Cortex XDR is a simple platform that's easy for administrators and users. You have a lot of flexibility to change or customize the features."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"Since they've done their most recent update, the ease to isolate endpoints is valuable. If we find one where there is a virus on it, we can easily isolate it. We don't even have to contact the user. We don't have to manually take them off the network. We can easily isolate them."
"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."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"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."
"Detections could be improved."
"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."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"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."
"Some of the less tech-savvy users sometimes find it difficult in adjusting and learning how to use the platform."
"Technical support can be a bit slow at times."
"They need to focus on more scalability (as much as possible) so that the solution can run across all supported OS."
"If the IT department is used to "cloning" endpoints (making images) you are going to have a hard time trying to install the product and you are going to end up reading a lot of Check Point documents."
"I'd also love to see them add full MDM support, but I appreciate that that's not the product market. If it did come in, I'd be more than happy to look at additional modules. It was probably one of the easiest products I've ever had to deploy it, but if it's not capable of doing MD, then that's going to impact its usefulness to us."
"Sometimes, with a lot of clients (1,000) the UI is a bit sluggish."
"It would be useful if you could also mark blocks as safe from a client. Now users always have to ask an admin to make exclusions."
"The only thing that our customers want, is lower prices."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"The GUI could be improved."
"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Harmony Endpoint is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 103 reviews while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews. Check Point Harmony Endpoint is rated 8.8, while Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point Harmony Endpoint writes "Excellent anti-ransomware protection, zero-day phishing protection, and web browsing filtering". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". Check Point Harmony Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Check Point Harmony Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.