Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Panda Adaptive Defense 360 comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
13th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (5th)
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
29th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
23rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mark Broughton - PeerSpot reviewer
Tighter integration with Umbrella and Firepower gave us eye-opening information
We were using a third-party help desk. One of the ways that they were fixing problems was to delete the client and then add the client back if there was an issue where the client had stopped communicating. Any improvement in the client communicating back to the server would be good, particularly for machines that are offline for a couple of weeks. A lot of our guys were working on a rotation where the machine might be offline for that long. They were also terrible about rebooting their machines, so those network connections didn't necessarily get refreshed. So, anything that could improve that communication would be good. Also, an easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful. If you could say, "Okay, we've got these two machines. This one says it's not reporting and this one says it's been reporting. Obviously, somebody did a reinstall," it would help. That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number. Not that Cisco was going to come down on you and say, "Oh, you're using too many licenses," right away. But to have a much more accurate license usage count by being able to better dedupe the records would be good. I also sent over a couple of other ideas to our technical rep. A lot of that had to do with the reporting options. It would be really nice to be able to do a lot more in the reporting. You can't really drill down into the reports that are there. The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint. Also, there was one section when I was playing with the automation where it was asking for the endpoint type rather than the machine name. If I could have just put in the machine name, that would have been great. So there are some opportunities, when it comes to searching, to have more options. If I wanted to search, for example, by a Mac address because, for some reason, I thought there was a duplication and I didn't have the machine name, how could I pull it up with the Mac address? When you're getting to that level, you're really starting to get into the ticky tacky. I would definitely put the reporting and documentation way ahead of that.
PaolaLamura - PeerSpot reviewer
While being easy to manage and create reports, the tool also offers a good UI
I rate the ease of use and management of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 an eight on a scale of one to ten. The tool's ability to provide information about the vulnerability is the most impactful feature of the product that has an impact on our company's security posture. Speaking about scenarios where the solution effectively prevented the security breach, I would say that our company sees how the tool blocks when our customers accidentally click on some malware, after which it quarantines that file. My company makes a playbook with the SOAR tool that Panda Adaptive Defense 360 uses to block and isolate attacks. In our company's system, if there is a big event that occurs, then to block the endpoint, we use SOAR with Panda Adaptive Defense 360 to block and isolate attacks or threats. The solution's real-time monitoring has improved our company's ability to detect threats if we use it in our company with Panda SIEMFeeder. Only if in my company there is a need to do some research, prepare a report, or if we want to change the policy, so it is not very often that we use the visualization part of the tool in our company. The reporting and analytics part of the tool has helped with the decision-making in our company since we combine different kinds of logs and situations from different ingestion logs, and we can configure a specific alert. In my company, we use the tool's data search functionality if required to check the information we need. Presently, our company uses the configuration alert and SIEMFeeder in our system. I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The most valuable feature is its threat protection and data privacy, including its cyber attack and data protection, as we need to cover and protect data on user devices."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"The product provides sandboxing options like file reputation and file analysis."
"Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent."
"It is easy to manage."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter application control."
"Great technical support staff."
"It prevents our users from circumventing security. Everything is password protected so they can't get into it. They can't uninstall it. They can't do anything."
"The most valuable feature of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is we don't have to have dedicated infrastructure on-premise because it is cloud-based."
"It is stable, and the performance is good."
"We have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic."
 

Cons

"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"Due to the complexity of the technology that is used and its advanced threat detection capabilities, it is possible to encounter many delays in operation."
"It cannot currently block URLs over websites."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"It is an expensive solution."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"The implementation was difficult."
"The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system."
"I'd like to integrate it into my main services."
"Needs a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether it's valid."
"The solution should have additional endpoint protection."
"They need to expand their offering of add-ons to enhance capabilities further."
"The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor, however, these issues are common with other vendors, not just WatchGuard."
"The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"The solution's price is about the same as that of Palo Alto solutions."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"Cisco's pricing is reasonable. We also do not need to opt for niche players, which would have charged us significantly more than Cisco for ecosystem solutions. We are highly satisfied with the pricing structure of Cisco's solutions they are reasonable."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"The licensing is subscription-based and priced well compared to other endpoint security solutions."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Hospitality Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
I am not entirely sure about the exact licensing cost. It ranges from 2,000 to 2,500 INR annually.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Previously, there were options to uninstall the agent without a password if you had admin access, and this could be improved. It may require a password for uninstalling clients, which would be help...
What do you like most about Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that I like the tool's UI, ease of management, ease of making reports, and the ability to export information easily.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
Although it is not a cheap solution, it is satisfying and functional. It is worth the money and provides good return on investment.
What needs improvement with Panda Security Adaptive Defense?
The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor, however, these issues are common with other vendors, not just WatchGuard.
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Panda Security Endpoint Protection, Panda Security for Desktops
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.