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) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Intercept X Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (14th), ZTNA (9th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (13th), Ransomware Protection (4th)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
20th
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 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 Intercept X Endpoint is 1.6%, down from 1.8% 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 Networks3.5%
Intercept X Endpoint1.6%
Malwarebytes Teams2.1%
Other92.8%
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

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"The positive impacts I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks include a complete 360-degree view of our security posture altogether, being a uniform platform where we are ingesting logs from multiple resources."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
"It is very easy to set up and easy to use. It is also not resource-intensive."
"The key factor that attracted me to Sophos Intercept X was the multi-platform. I have multiple clients that have mixed environments of Mac and Windows. I am able to deliver a standard solution, regardless of the platform."
"The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing."
"It is a practically maintenance free intelligent system that independently protects environments from malicious attacks."
"The most valuable features are the range and restriction."
"Intercept X's smart prevention it's very good as so are its machine learning capabilities for troubleshooting channels and files."
"The malware detection is the key feature."
"The solution's initial setup process was straightforward."
"Being able to cloud manage it from just a cloud login is valuable. We can get to it from anywhere, which is really helpful. The fact that we can remediate from the cloud console is one of our favorite features."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to customize for different groups."
"The technical support services are good."
"The behavior-based detection is very nice, and it combats zero-day threats by looking for anomalous behaviors."
"I was very satisfied with Malwarebytes in terms of its antivirus abilities."
"This solution helps us by providing central management of anti-malware and anti-exploit functionality."
"Ten times a day, improved signatures will be downloaded, so it is very up-to-date in terms of malware experience."
"The most valuable features of Malwarebytes are the agents, user experience, efficiency of the findings, and MDR features."
 

Cons

"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."
"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"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."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."
"The cloud management console could be a little more user-friendly."
"Features that should be improved in the upgrade involve the excessive consumption of the the solution's processor, RAM and resources."
"I would inquire why it is not sold directly to end users."
"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."
"The number one thing I would like is if their support could be a little faster and it would be a little easier to get a hold of support when you need them."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"The product’s DDoS and AI features must be improved."
"The solution can be expensive, although we do see the value in it."
"Every once in a while, it gets clobbered by updates from other places. I don't think this should happen."
"We had a little performance problem with the solution, but that's been resolved. Since then, it's been running well."
"Overall, I haven't found any ways the solution lacks in features or usability."
"It would be better if updates could be downloaded, and deployed, on-premises to avoid low bandwidth causing issues."
"The online reporting needs to be improved. Currently, we have to look at it online, and if we want to download a report, it just downloads as an Excel file. It's just raw information. There needs to be some way to better display it when it's downloaded."
"The reporting is not as flexible as you would find with other antivirus software."
"Requires increased efficiency in terms of detecting false positives."
"I would like to see integration with other vendors going forward."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"When you start going to the EDR technologies and the MTR, it is a little bit expensive. It's a very good technology, and obviously, you're going to pay for it, but the pricing could do a little bit of work."
"I find the pricing to be a little bit expensive, although it is acceptable, for now."
"Customers need to pay for a license for Intercept X Endpoint based on the number of users and servers they have. The pricing is considered normal and not overly expensive."
"The price of Sophos Intercept X is competitive."
"Its price is reasonable."
"It is a high-cost solution."
"You can pay monthly, but most of our customers choose annual subscriptions because they are less expensive."
"There is a yearly payment to be made. For each client, it costs around 15 dollars. There are no additional costs besides the licensing price we pay to use the solution."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
"The platform pricing is competitive with other antivirus products."
"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the product's pricing a seven."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
883,044 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
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 Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
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.
883,044 professionals have used our research since 2012.