We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and ESET Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Although both solutions received high marks from users, Cortex XDR reviewers feel that it is an expensive product. ESET Endpoint Security is the winner in this comparison since its reviewers feel that it is a cost-effective solution.
"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."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"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."
"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."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"We can visualize and control the activities in the environment from anywhere."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"The stability is great."
"What is great about ESET is the ERA Web Console through which we can pull various reports, monitor and administer all clients and servers, and the console is easy to use."
"It effectively catches unwanted stuff. It has saved our bacon over many years."
"The solution is very lightweight and does not consume that much processor in terms of CPU utilization. The centralized management system is very good."
"The product offers great reporting tools"
"It has been working fine. It lets you know when it finds things. We didn't have any incident where the place had to shut down or was taken over by anything. We haven't had any issues that we know of."
"It rarely gets in the way, and we don't even notice it scanning."
"The tools and the features available with this solution are very competitive. It is always updated to prevent upcoming attacks."
"Detections could be improved."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"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."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"The GUI could be improved."
"Limited remote connection."
"Currently, we are monitoring all USB drives and ports but we would like to improve our device control capabilities."
"There are a large number of false positives."
"The licensing model is complex to understand. It requires expertise to explain how the licensing works. You need expertise to guide you through the subscription plan."
"The price could be a little lower."
"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."
"It tends to do 99.9% of things. The only thing I'd like is single sign-on authentication into their cloud platform so that my users can be properly authenticated against it."
"We are looking to move towards an EDR solution rather than EPP. EDR is a solution that can dynamically detect threats based on the process behavior. It would be better if this solution was an EDR and an EPP solution, this would increase security protection."
"The initial setup of ESET Endpoint Security can be complicated when you get involved with encryption."
"A few times, we have had problems with downloading an agent. We had to try multiple times and multiple uploads."
"Sometimes, ESET sends alerts within my own network that cause confusion. That is, it might warn about contamination, or that the VM has crashed, but it doesn't go further than that. It just shows me the alert and sometimes I am not sure what to do about it."
"I don't know if it's possible but I'm always looking for better protection."
"It's not scalable in that you cannot use a license for multiple devices."
"The interface is good. However, it could always be better. It could be more user-friendly."
"It's hard to get support for ESET in Hong Kong and China. There's a number to call that goes nowhere. You can upgrade to the premium service, but there are a few restrictions."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More ESET Endpoint Protection Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 97 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is rated 8.2. 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 ESET Endpoint Protection Platform writes "Easy to set up with good security and rapidly improving capabilities". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response, whereas ESET Endpoint Protection Platform is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. ESET Endpoint Protection Platform 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.