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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs Trellix Endpoint Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (3rd)
Trellix Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
11th
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 4.3%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Endpoint Security is 3.5%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammad Qaw - PeerSpot reviewer
Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security
The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR. If you are not integrating it or feeding in your network traffic, then you are just buying a normal antivirus which doesn't make any sense. You are paying double the price to use the antivirus feature or to say you have XDR, but in reality you are not using it. The solution should include an on-premises option because some customers want only on-premises. It would be hard, but good to do if possible. Open XDR would be beneficial in the future. Right now, the solution is Closed XDR so cannot communicate with the few new vendors in the Open XDR market.
AhmedEl-Tayeb - PeerSpot reviewer
Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services
Some of our products have a first and second line owned by us. We are giving support services to the customers instead of the vendor. Some other products are supported directly by the technology vendor, however. Technical support from the vendor is very bad. Usually, when the customer submits a ticket, they put a severity level on the case. Whenever the case is very important, and there is a real malfunction in the product on the customer side, and there is something down that needs someone to have a look immediately, it takes more time than it should to even engage with the customer. When someone has to contact the customer and have a remote session within the customer environment, they sometimes lack in terms of communication with the customer. The support centers are located in the East and not all have an acceptable level of English in order to communicate directly with the customer.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"The initial setup isn't too bad."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"If there are multiple alerts, the app will automatically create and rate an event instead of going through each one."
"Automatic user recovery prior to Windows booting up."
"Communication with all Mcafee products (also 3rd parties) by DXL infrastructure."
"I have found many of the features to be useful."
"The manageability of the product itself is its most valuable aspect. You have the underlying EPO, and on top of it, you can deploy the various components as you require. This is unlike other solutions like Symantec where you have to deploy everything or nothing. With this solution, you can choose to only deploy antivirus or only deploy a firewall, or only something else. I choose the components and that deployment is done through EPO. It makes manageability very flexible."
"The product has a robust reporting feature"
"The user behavioral analysis feature is great."
"Tech support is responsive. They're good, the very best."
"It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts."
 

Cons

"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."
"I would like to see improvement in the tool's user interface, particularly in the area of managing alerts and providing more reporting capabilities."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"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."
"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."
"There are a large number of false positives."
"McAfee GW Security and McAfee Child Safety need some improvement as they are relatively new."
"We experienced some bad behavior when we first installed the product. The system also starts slowly in some instances. If for some reason this solution crashes, we could lose all our data."
"The local technical support could be better."
"We have a lot of problems with the user experience and it's difficult to implement. MacAfee's better than the ancient anti-virus solutions but it's a little slow to resolve. Many files with malware were destroyed through the network, and MacAfee doesn't detect anything."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"Users can just install software into their computers. We need some sort of application control system that, if there are any pieces of software that are not whitelisted, then the solution could flag it or maybe alert the administers. That would be very helpful."
"The product could do more to keep administration alerted to detected threats on endpoints."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"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."
"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 is "expensive" and flexible."
"The price was fine."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"I would rate the cost as four to five, considering it's normal compared to other products. I find it nominal and worth the money."
"The price of this product is good."
"It is reasonably priced."
"I think Trellix is more on the higher side of the market, just on a general scale, but I also think it depends on what particular package you choose."
"Its price is reasonable, but it could be made free."
"It provides good value by striking a balance between cost-effectiveness and feature richness."
"There are some extra expenses for using the product, in addition to licensing related to the maintenance of the product."
"Licensing is paid yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
41%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
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 ...
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...
How does McAfee Endpoint Security compare with MVISION?
The flexible manageability of McAfee Endpoint Security is one of our favorite aspects of this solution. You can deploy various components as desired with McAfee Endpoint Security, whereas many othe...
What do you like most about McAfee Endpoint Security?
It provides a robust defense against cybersecurity threats while offering user-friendly features like notifications and approval prompts.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Endpoint Security?
The solution is not an expensive tool. Compared to other options, it's mostly average-priced. I've deployed it for customers ranging from 100 nodes to over 5,000 nodes. Its renewal prices are very ...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
McAfee Endpoint Security, McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection, McAfee Endpoint Protection, Total Protection for Endpoint, Intel Security Total Protection for Endpoint, MCAFEE Complete Endpoint Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
inHouseIT, Seagate Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Trellix Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.