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
6.8
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)
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) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
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.
reviewer2594097 - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Executive Officer at a wholesaler/distributor with 11-50 employees
Exceptional malware protection with regular updates and behavior-based detection
There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity. The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it. Other customers have mentioned issues with false positives. It lacks enterprise-level management and more enterprise functionality. CrowdStrike and SentinelOne are much more enterprise-grade solutions. Malwarebytes has limited integration with cybersecurity tools and lacks enterprise integrations because it is not an enterprise product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"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."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."
"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."
"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."
"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, with playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."
"There are additional security features in Sophos Intercept X as well as proxy rules and settings that help us in minimizing the sites that our agents can go to, even after their work hours."
"The most valuable features of Sophos Intercept X are the minimal configuration needed for the end user and the central view of all the endpoints. There are plenty of tools to control and manage the endpoints. Additionally, there is the capability of connecting the endpoint to the CLI."
"The deployment is quick. It just depends on the environment and what you may be replacing."
"It is stable and has a good price. I find it very good."
"We most value the price and interface quality with Sophos Intercept X. We focus on solution quality."
"There are products that are technically stronger. However, this product has everything in one solution, which makes it a strong endpoint option."
"The EDR (Enhanced Data Detection and Response) and the DLP (Data Loss Prevention) components are valuable assets."
"The client isolation feature is a very effective feature."
"The behavior-based detection is very nice, and it combats zero-day threats by looking for anomalous behaviors."
"The most valuable feature is that it stops malware, which is important."
"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 product provides notifications for suspicious events. We have several public access points. The product helps to prevent unauthorized entry. Its most valuable features are pre-installation procedures and a cloud console. The console's interface is simple and can be viewed easily to take action. It covers everything in terms of security threats."
"Being able to carry out a full scan on your system."
"It's very versatile and thorough."
"I never have to look at it or do anything with it, and then my system just stays clean."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to customize for different groups."
 

Cons

"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"There's room for improvement with Mac device installations, which can be challenging."
"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Technical support can be improved. There could be shared support, i.e. where someone in Egypt can respond."
"It would be better if it can automatically generate a report for each and every user so that the users get to know the things that shouldn't be accessed from their PCs. It can have information about malicious and non-malicious sites so users are aware of them, and they don't access malicious websites. Such reports can be generated at the end of the day. We should also be able to get through to their support team quickly. Currently, it takes more than half an hour to get through to a technical person."
"Intercept X could enhance its support services, particularly in terms of response time and resource allocation."
"We had some initial problems with our deployment, and they were more around uninstalling Sophos Basic and installing Sophos Intercept X. We had some challenges with some of the uninstallation scripts. They can improve the deployment of Sophos Intercept X when there is already an existing Sophos version. They can also provide more information in the form of best practices and lessons learned from previous findings. A knowledge base with this type of information would be helpful."
"The majority of our systems are MacBooks and their solution release cycle is slow to endorsing or support the MacBook's latest OS or hardware platform. For example, when Sophos macOS Big Sur version 11 was released, it took them a while to support this version of OS. A similar situation occurred when the MacBook M1 hardware CPU was released. They have not fully supported the native M1 CPU to this day. They need to speed up the solutions release cycle."
"Should include additional integration."
"Needs more flexible reporting, particularly for medium to large size companies."
"There is room for improvement in the way it is deployed, in terms of being able to distribute it. Right now we have to get our hands on a machine to deploy it. It would be nice if there was an easier system."
"The interface could be improved. Currently, you need to really dig around to find the elements you need."
"I would like to see a little more detail in the log. So, when an event occurs, I'd like to know not just when it happened and on what device, but what activity was taking place on the machine at the time so that we can drill down. If we get a false positive, we have to do a lot of research and go back and forth with our end-users to know why it was a false positive. So, having a little more detail around detections and events would probably be my most asked feature."
"The product has major problems in almost every facet of setup and use including setup, configuration, lack of functionality, lack of stability, false positives, questionable reporting, inability to protect from randsomeware and poor technical support and development."
"This solution reports far too many false positives!"
"It would be better if updates could be downloaded, and deployed, on-premises to avoid low bandwidth causing issues."
"It's not good in search hunting."
"Strictly in terms of cyber security, the release cycle should be quarterly, at most. It shouldn't be more frequent than that because, for one thing, keeping up with tech support is difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"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."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"I find the pricing to be a little bit expensive, although it is acceptable, for now."
"The solution requires an annual subscription."
"The price of this product should be reduced because it is a little high."
"We are happy with the pricing across all Sophos products."
"Licensing costs are not expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"It's not bad, but compared to competitors, it's a little bit on the high side. The price could be more competitive."
"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."
"The platform pricing is competitive with other antivirus products."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"The cost may be something in the ballpark of $20-25 a year per computer."
"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."
"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."
"We expect to pay $1,000 USD a month, depending on the number of users."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
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: March 2026.
883,824 professionals have used our research since 2012.