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

Intercept X Endpoint vs Malwarebytes Teams comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 15, 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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
105
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (7th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Intercept X Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (16th), ZTNA (10th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (8th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
22nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Intercept X Endpoint is 1.5%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Malwarebytes Teams is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
Intercept X Endpoint1.5%
Malwarebytes Teams2.1%
Other93.0%
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.
AM
IT Head at Dee Development
Has struggled to detect major threats but has offered basic protection over time
Intercept X Endpoint could learn from CrowdStrike in terms of overall performance and filtering because performance is most important, especially these days as Windows is getting buggier and buggier, which puts a huge load on the PC, and even with the most advanced CPUs and everything in place, it still lags in performance in so many places, thanks to Windows' clumsy design of these collaboration suites that make it extremely heavy on PC's resources. The interface of Intercept X Endpoint is quite old-fashioned. The Sophos interfaces, including for Intercept X Endpoint, are quite bad actually; to be very honest, even in UTM boxes, they are not great at all. You can hardly see a very small portion of windows while it's creating the firewall rules, and we have been complaining about this for quite some time, but there hasn't been any improvement on those grounds. Intercept X Endpoint's anti-ransomware capabilities failed us during a bad attack, and just because of our own backup policies, we could restore our normal operations; otherwise, if we had to depend on this solution, we would have been long dead because the infection was so bad, it couldn't even detect the infection. Intercept X Endpoint cannot handle zero-day attacks; in my experience, last year, we had this major issue with a malware attack, and it happened just because of our backup policies that we were able to recover without any support from Sophos, which just told us they would charge us some 1 Crore in rupees. Intercept X Endpoint should improve their implementation; things will never be perfect for the new world. This new world is always facing new kinds of attacks and new ways to compromise the system. They need to learn fast, implement fast, and sometimes redesigning the solution is the solution—not just patchwork. There was a time we used to love Sophos because of its fresh design and innovative thought. In my experience, when technical companies are led by MBA professionals, they lose their shine on the technical part and become more dependent on target sales; it turns into a marketing-centric operation that loses the technical focus completely.
Davina Becker - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Content Strategist at PeerSpot
Provides protection against malware but needs improved billing transparency
I can only speak to it on a personal level. If someone is considering it, they should test it on their own systems. I can't personally recommend it because each person has their own needs. While it may work for me as a malware antivirus solution, I can't recommend it to someone else who may have a different system or use case. I rate the overall solution 7.5 out of 10. Malwarebytes protects me against malware. If they fix the pricing model so it's not automatically charging me, the rating could improve. Until then, I can't give it an 8.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The main benefit of using Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks while employing Palo Alto Firewall at the internet edge is that it improves security on our endpoint devices, integrating seamlessly with Palo Alto Firewalls to deliver comprehensive network, analyst, and security details all in a single dashboard, which allows us to manage everything from our network devices."
"We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"Best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"Sophos Intercept X is easy to install and has a lower price than similar solutions."
"I consider the heuristics to be most valuable, the fact that the solution does not work solely on signatures."
"The threat analysis center is nice."
"It is not just a simple virus scanning product. It handles more advanced needs."
"The most valuable feature of Intercept X its ability to stay ahead of the infection. By the time the ransomware spreads to the next machine in line, the data has already been encrypted on that workstation. It didn't matter what the ransomware did because could go in and get it back."
"Very stable solution."
"The forensics within the solution are quite good. The ransomware mitigation is also impressive."
"The initial setup is simple."
"This solution helps us by providing central management of anti-malware and anti-exploit functionality."
"It's very versatile and thorough."
"It allows us to have better knowledge of the way people use the tool and how we can improve their workflows."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that I can use it wherever I want, be it at the office, at home, or even outside."
"When it comes to frontend protections, it has some of the best definitions. In addition, they do traditional signature and heuristic detection a lot better than Microsoft and some other players in that space."
"The behavior-based detection is very nice, and it combats zero-day threats by looking for anomalous behaviors."
"I like the solution's ability to detect potentially unwanted programs. For some reason, it seems superior to other solutions, or at least in comparison to McAfee."
"The solution is very good at scanning."
 

Cons

"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"They are charging for Network Traffic Analyzer (NTA) services, so if the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"It takes time to scan the servers and devices."
"The customer service and support could be improved in regards to response time. It could be faster."
"They should keep doing what they're doing. Both of them have entered the EDR/MDR space, and they're keeping up with their competitors. I have a hard time understanding why their capabilities aren't garnering more attention."
"The solution is heavy in the usage of resources, you can notice the performance decrease. This should prove in the future."
"Pricing is high."
"It should offer better security updates."
"I recommend that Intercept X Endpoint should include a patch assessment feature. Various vendors offer virtual patching solutions, which could be a game-changer, especially for the financial sector where frequent service restarts are challenging. These solutions allow patching servers without the need for restarts. Incorporating these features into Intercept X Endpoint would enhance its effectiveness in securing endpoints and servers."
"The security is good but the feature set is limited."
"The Data Loss Prevention module can be better. It should also have threat hunting capabilities."
"The stability and performance of the solution are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The reporting is not as flexible as you would find with other antivirus software."
"I really hate the automatic rebuilding without even asking. It's just an annoyance that they should at least ask me, like a month before they bill me."
"They should make it faster, less taxing on the processor."
"Malwarebytes should improve its mobile compatibility."
"The product could be improved in blocking malicious traffic, such as communication with known malicious IP addresses."
"The product's stability needs improvement."
"I would like to see integration with other vendors going forward."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The price was fine."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"Very costly product."
"Licensing costs are not expensive."
"The solution offers both a three-year license and an annual license. I would rate the product's pricing a one out of ten."
"We have bought a three-year license."
"You can purchase a license for one to three years."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing ten out of ten."
"They offer both monthly and yearly licenses."
"The solution is not expensive."
"Licensing is based on the number of users. They give a discount for editors who are considered as important members. From what I know, Sophos products are not expensive. If you have a license extension, you just need to contact the editor or partner to change the mode of licensing or extend the license to cover more people."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"We expect to pay $1,000 USD a month, depending on the number of users."
"I would say that it's affordable. It costs much less than Sentinel One, CrowdStrike, or anything of that nature. But, at the same time, you are getting what you pay for. So I would say it's one of the best when you're comparing traditional NextGen AVs like Webroot that aren't the best in the bunch."
"Its cost is around $60 a machine. The cost of the total solution for 250 people is about $8,500 a year. If we add EDR to it, it will bring that cost up to about $15,000. The cost for Carbon Black is about $25,000, which is $10,000 more, but you get all AI functions with it."
"It is really expensive. We've got between 30 and 40 licenses every year, and for the number of licenses that we have, we're finding that Malwarebytes on average costs between $900 and $1,000 more per year than comparable options. We're paying about $3,300 per year for these licenses. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"The licensing is per seat, with clients being a little less expensive than servers. If we need more licenses, we can accomplish that within a day. As Malwarebytes adds new features to their product, such as DNS filtering and a patching module, they want to charge us more even though we're a premium user, which isn't ideal."
"The platform pricing is competitive with other antivirus products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
5%
Comms Service Provider
10%
University
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business42
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business75
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise22
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise6
 

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,...
How does Crodwstrike Falcon compare with Sophos Intercept X?
I like that Crowdstrike Falcon allows me to easily correlate data between my firewalls. Its detection and machine lea...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sophos Intercept X?
Intercept X Endpoint has some impact on the budget. It is quite costly when measuring Intercept X Endpoint's protecti...
What do you like most about Malwarebytes?
Ten times a day, improved signatures will be downloaded, so it is very up-to-date in terms of malware experience.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Malwarebytes?
I really hate the automatic rebilling without officially confirming it with me. It's an annoyance and they should at ...
What needs improvement with Malwarebytes?
It takes up too much space when it's trying to run in the background.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sophos Intercept X
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Flexible Systems
Knutson Construction
Find out what your peers are saying about Intercept X Endpoint vs. Malwarebytes Teams and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.