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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (7th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (3rd)
Trellix Endpoint Security (...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 4.2%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is 1.6%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammad Qaw - PeerSpot reviewer
Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security
The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR. If you are not integrating it or feeding in your network traffic, then you are just buying a normal antivirus which doesn't make any sense. You are paying double the price to use the antivirus feature or to say you have XDR, but in reality you are not using it. The solution should include an on-premises option because some customers want only on-premises. It would be hard, but good to do if possible. Open XDR would be beneficial in the future. Right now, the solution is Closed XDR so cannot communicate with the few new vendors in the Open XDR market.
Venugopal Potumudi - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable with good independent modules and a straightforward setup
I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. Having used Trend Micro as well, I would rate Trend Micro higher. However, I would still choose this product as a second option. When we recommend a product, we would recommend something based on the fit of the product and customer requirements. We worked with Defender, we worked with Trend Micro, and we worked with McAfee. All of them almost overlap in multiple use cases. That said, we do see the customer IT strategy and where they're going, and they are adopting Azure more. We know there are certain limitations in their landscape where there may be some old legacy systems, and in that case, then we would either switch back to McAfee or Trend Micro instead of Defender.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"From a single pane of glass, you can easily manage all of your endpoints."
"It is an easy-to-use tool."
"The product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable network security feature is the network sandbox solution. This sandbox feature works on traffic flow."
"Trellix Endpoint Security has a full suite of DLP."
"The installation phase of the solution was very easy."
"The technical support services are good."
"What I like most about McAfee MVISION Endpoint is that it's very user-friendly. You do need some knowledge on how to navigate the portal, but as soon as you've gained that knowledge, navigation will no longer be an issue. I have no complaints about McAfee MVISION Endpoint. For me, the product is perfect the way it is. It's great right now, and it's doing good as it is."
"The activation of features within ENS and the collection of threats into a single console is a strong point."
"Provides protection against threats."
 

Cons

"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."
"I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included."
"Product might have some bugs."
"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"When it comes to malware files, it should be a little quick because, at times, it would give a wrong result in the sense of what it might be on malware, even if it still might be a normal one."
"I think sometimes Cortex XDR agent automatically stops event capturing from the device, and then even the dashboard does not get any notifications from the agent."
"The GUI could be improved."
"The way that signatures work when using this solution could be improved. They could be more user friendly. We would like the ability to select a client's signature from a menu or file share to save time."
"The solution needs to work on memory consumption. It is too high."
"The detection and response capabilities need to be improved."
"The complexity of advanced modules can be improved."
"It is a very heavy tool, unfortunately."
"The product is consolidating its portfolio into one product. It is difficult at the moment."
"Most of these types of solutions including others, such as Carbon Black and FortiEDR, all have the same features. However, Carbon Black is the leader when it comes to being robust and user-friendly and this solution should improve in those areas to stay more competitive."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a yearly renewal."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"The price was fine."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is not a cheap solution...I don't think any costs are involved in the maintenance of the solution."
"Microsoft Defender is not cheap and from a cost perspective, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) is a better option."
"There's a subscription on a yearly basis. It's not that expensive; it's quite affordable."
"We are on an annual subscription for McAfee MVISION Endpoint. The cost for the license could be less expensive."
"Pricing for McAfee MVISION Endpoint is not very good, and I would rate its cost three out of five, though I won't be able to mention how much its actual price is."
"It is not so cheap in comparison to Sophos and other solutions."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The product pricing is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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. The ability to reverse damage caused by ransomware with minimal interruptions to...
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 that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
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, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy various components as desired with McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas many othe...
How does Crowdstrike Falcon compare with FireEye Endpoint Security?
The Crowdstrike Falcon program has a simple to use user interface, making it both an easy to use as well as an effective program. Its graphical design is such that it makes an extremely useful too...
What do you like most about McAfee MVISION Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (HX)
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Tech Resources Limited, Globe Telecom, Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.