No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Tanium comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 2026

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...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
36th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
29th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tanium
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
16th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (4th), Vulnerability Management (25th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tanium is 2.3%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.6%
Tanium2.3%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.0%
Other93.1%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research Development and Innovation at CSIR
Offers useful threat hunting and response capabilities but struggles to justify cost for smaller deployments
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR components; I also get involved with some of the XDR components, especially for the cloud. Regarding analysis features, such as deep behavioral detection, I do use it sometimes; I usually don't use the automated version of it, as I prefer threat hunting directly, depending on if the season is available. I know some of them have pretty good analytics engines, but I tend to do the threat hunting on my own. I manage incident response for a bunch of companies, so some of them have Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response integrated into Sentinel, some into Fortinet, and others into various tools. When considering cost-effectiveness, their pricing structure works such that if you're a large organization with more than a thousand endpoints to deploy to, then Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is worthwhile. But for anything less than 300, it's too expensive; obviously, the more you buy, the better the price, making it cheaper for you. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response best fits enterprise-level businesses such as huge corporations; however, we are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment. We're trying to see how we can improve it with some of our clients, but at the moment, it's struggling compared to other EDR solutions that we have deployed. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response a six.
MA
Division Manager, Information Technology at a legal firm with 51-200 employees
Centralized policies have improved remote endpoint control and have simplified data visibility
The integration is not simple and easy. It requires experienced users or people who have done the implementation. When certain policies are applied, they do not immediately push the policies. For example, we manage endpoint device USB access. We set a policy to block it, but it does not come into effect immediately. Sometimes it takes three or four days for it to reflect. That is a pain point. I have raised this issue with support as well, but they said that I need to limit the number of devices in the policy. In terms of application deployment, for us, it was seamless.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's stability is generally good."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"Palo Alto is one of the tech vendors that always provides top-of-the-line products."
"Implementing Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has had a significant impact on my security analyst workload because it becomes much easier."
"The scalability of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very good."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"The dashboard is very good and you can consider it as an interactive UI."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"If one supports the notion that layered security needs to focus on inside out risk instead of trying to securing the perimeter - a very compelling tool for where to focus your infosec/forensic brain power."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"Tanium is a very good product and I would rate it eight or nine out of ten."
"I find the inventory and compliance features of Tanium to be the most impressive."
"Tanium is highly scalable."
"The product is granular and can build complex roles compared to other EDR vendors."
"Threat hunting is a very good feature on Tanium. We have just started using it and have not used it extensively."
"For inventory purposes, it's from one of the best things on the scene, as you can get live inventory."
"I like the fact that you can create patching campaigns depending on the area of your network that you want to address first."
"Tanium's most valuable features are patch management, inventory, and distribution software."
 

Cons

"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"The downside to the solution is that there are a large number of false positives."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a very good product, but financially, it is very expensive, so the company should look into that area."
"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."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"We are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment."
"The technical support will need to be improved."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"There is room for improvement in the product features related to device control, particularly USB management."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler."
"I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance."
"The solution can give a lot of false positives."
"The solution can give a lot of false positives."
"The solution needs to improve the reporting and tracking capabilities."
"It is not really additional functions, or the features that are needed, rather the complexity would be reduced based on the number of modules required to put together a comprehensive operational security and risk compliance model."
"Tanium required local admin or root rights on Mac devices, which did not comply with our security policies. This made the solution less suitable for our restrictive environment."
"Our biggest issue with the solution is its lack of mobility."
"There are some bugs in the product. The tool needs to improve in the area of reporting."
"The problem or challenge is a pre-sales and go-to strategy for the SMB market delivered through a channel or model. It's very convoluted and vague, which leads to some confusion about the various types of modules, and the device-to-seat cost is extremely difficult to calculate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"I feel it is fairly priced."
"Very costly product."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"The pricing is manageable."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"It is higher than some competitors in the market."
"The solution offers value for money."
"Tanium is a more expensive solution in Latin America than some of the competitors, such as BigFix."
"The product's pricing differs from region to region depending on negotiations and the number of endpoints."
"It's an expensive solution. It would be nice if the cost were lower."
"The solution is expensive but it's a good investment."
"There is an annual license required to use this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business45
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise48
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
 

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. ...
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 th...
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,...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
What needs improvement with Tanium?
While there is always room for improvement, I am pleased with Tanium.
What is your primary use case for Tanium?
The primary use case for Tanium ( /products/tanium-reviews ) is compliance, patching, and inventory as part of the co...
What advice do you have for others considering Tanium?
For smaller companies, Tanium is quite a big investment, and one needs to have a considerable setup to make it econom...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
Tanium Inc Cloud, Tanium XEM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
JPMorgan Chase, eBay, Amazon, US Bank, MetLife, pwc, Cerner, Delphi, MGM Grand, New York Life
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Tanium and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.