Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Palo Alto Networks and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Palo Alto Networks is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.6, while OpenText is ranked #47. Palo Alto Networks holds a 3.5% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Palo Alto Networks users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...

Read 106 Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks reviews

14,649 Views
8,496 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...

Read 31 OpenText Core Endpoint Protection reviews

2,482 Views
2,259 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...

OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and OpenText Core Endpoint Protection compete in the endpoint protection category. Cortex XDR may have an advantage due to its advanced detection features and integration capabilities, while OpenText excels in cost-effectiveness and ease of deployment.

Features: Cortex XDR offers advanced detection capabilities, machine learning, and behavior-based analytics, along with WildFire AI and sandboxing. Its ability to integrate easily with Palo Alto solutions provides comprehensive security coverage. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection excels in ease of deployment and cloud integration, offering a lightweight solution with AI features that enhance endpoint security.

Room for Improvement: Cortex XDR could enhance integration with other platforms, improve user interface customization, and streamline deployment processes while reducing false positives and memory consumption. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection may benefit from expanding its reporting capabilities, bolstering ransomware defenses, and enhancing control for Mac devices.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cortex XDR provides versatile deployment options across on-premises, public, and hybrid clouds, which can be complex, while OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers a smoother setup with emphasis on user-friendly cloud-based management. Customers have reported variable feedback on Cortex XDR’s technical support, whereas OpenText generally receives high satisfaction marks for customer service and support expertise.

Pricing and ROI: Cortex XDR is perceived as expensive, especially in certain markets like Latin America, but offers a significant return on investment through comprehensive protection features. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection, being cost-effective, appeals to companies looking for affordable endpoint protection with quick deployment and operational efficiency contributing to a good ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 883,692 peers since 2012

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...

Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

5th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

106

Ranking in other categories

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)

OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...

Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

47th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.3%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.5%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.3%
Other	95.2%

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

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.

Read full review

reviewer2584380

vCIO At Grove Networks Inc. at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

Improving threat detection is critical for enhanced protection

We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the contract we have with our clients as a cost-effective option for antivirus protection Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is cost-effective for rolling it out to all of our clients,…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."

"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."

"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."

"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."

"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."

"Implementing Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has had a significant impact on my security analyst workload because it becomes much easier."

"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."

"The normal protection was really effective, and we detected situations that if we didn't have Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it's highly likely that we would have been affected, but it protected the infrastructure."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security. This is very powerful."

"It is very lightweight on the workstations, not slowing them down while still doing its job very well."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is very scalable."

"The ease of use of the centralized admin console is its best asset."

"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."

"Speed"

"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."

"It is pretty unintrusive. It doesn't take over the system like McAfee or Norton. It doesn't use a whole lot of resources. McAfee and Norton use a lot of resources."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."

"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."

"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."

"Limited remote connection."

"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."

"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."

"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."

"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."

"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."

"We need to have a stronger defense against CryptoLock and other attackers."

"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."

"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."

"Their customer support should be better. We started having some issues with it, and we didn't get the required support."

"Since they're dealing with multi-core environments now, the best option would be for them to enhance the product so that the product can automatically do an assessment on the machine."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."

"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."

"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."

"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."

"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."

"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."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."

"From a pricing standpoint, I would rate it a four out of five."

"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."

"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."

"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."

"The pricing is high."

"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

883,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	44
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	47

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	35
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's advertised to do. Real-time threat detection also doesn't work as it should.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 9% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Complete vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 6% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 30% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 6% of the time

Malwarebytes Teams vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 5% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

HP Wolf Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

March 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

February 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection report

Download OpenText Core Endpoint Protection product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers cloud-managed endpoint security with AI integration, providing real-time protection and lightweight performance. It ensures low system impact, seamless cloud integration, and cost-effective security solutions for various devices.

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is a comprehensive endpoint security platform utilized by managed-service providers for antivirus and firewall functionality across servers, workstations, and mobile devices. It employs AI for robust threat detection, integrating with cloud applications for real-time updates. Multi-layered security features include malware protection, network defense, and DNS protection. Although connectivity and threat reporting need improvement, this platform extensively supports remote device management and integrates efficiently with Active Directory policies.

What are the key features of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Cloud Management: Centralized admin console for easy oversight
AI Integration: Enhanced threat detection capabilities
Lightweight Performance: Minimal impact on system resources
Real-time Threat Database: Constant updates for effective protection
Web Control Interface: Monitors and controls web traffic

What benefits are associated with OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Ease of Setup and Maintenance: Facilitates quick deployment and upkeep
Seamless Cloud Integration: Simplifies scalability and operation
Cost-Effectiveness: Affordable pricing with comprehensive features
Mobile Security Capabilities: Supports remote device management

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection finds application in industries requiring stringent data protection and peace of mind over device security. Managed-service providers implement this for comprehensive antivirus and firewall features, safeguarding multi-device networks. It is particularly useful for DNS protection and integrating with Active Directory policies, enabling secure yet flexible operations across sectors.

OpenText

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Mytech Partners

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

February 2026

Free Report: Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

883,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection 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.