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

Sangfor Endpoint Secure vs WatchGuard EPDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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 Detection and Response (EDR)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
106
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
27th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WatchGuard EPDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard EPDR is 1.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
WatchGuard EPDR1.8%
Sangfor Endpoint Secure0.8%
Other94.0%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

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.
OA
Coordinator Associate at National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases
Quick threat response and behavior analysis while enhancing network security
The main use case is usually related to security. It deals with attacks that come day-to-day such as zero-day attacks and APT attacks. Our main task is to secure the network infrastructure in the hospital where I work It facilitates the departments of IT and other departments to procure and…
NJ
Section Head, Information Technology at a transportation company with 201-500 employees
Using cloud-based console for software inventory management and email alerts
I have no idea if I use some automation functions. I can't find any disadvantages; maybe that is because many companies haven't used it. I would prefer to see some features such as AI in antivirus solutions. I appreciate reporting, but it could be better with monthly reporting or auto-generated monthly reports.

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."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the low consumption of system resources. The solution uses a lot of AI and machine learning."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The tool's AI feature is helpful in endpoint security."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"I like the tool's honeypot feature. Some features include having a honeypot to detect attacks in a certain area. Additionally, there is RDP protection, which means that when we remote into our server or any endpoint, we must enter a password as a second layer of security. It can also integrate with next-generation firewalls."
"It has a quick response time, threat intelligence, cybersecurity features, quick report generation, behavior analysis, dynamic detection, and quarantine features."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"It prevents our users from circumventing security. Everything is password protected so they can't get into it. They can't uninstall it. They can't do anything."
"The detection capabilities for malicious activities are effective."
"It is stable, and the performance is good."
"The dashboard management feature is valuable."
"The EDR has a high accuracy rate with only a few false positives."
"I would give the overall solution a rating of ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of Panda Security Adaptive Defense are the useful hardware information it provides, light on resources, controllable from the console, remote scan functionality, and the blocking of a lot of URL malware."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its device control."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"If they had pulse rate detection, it would be better."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"The solution lags to the real-time scenarios here and there."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"When an issue occurs, the response time for first-level support and the time taken for meetings could be improved."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"The categories in the web filtering should be more comprehensive."
"The categories in the web filtering should be more comprehensive. When a URL is not categorized, I face issues."
"The stability could be improved. My teammates who use Panda Security and I have experienced some issues."
"The AV and scanning features could be a little bit better."
"The solution should have additional endpoint protection."
"The software has performance issues due to its requirements on the processor, however, these issues are common with other vendors, not just WatchGuard."
"The implementation was difficult."
"I would rate Panda Adaptive Defense 360 overall eight points because I still try to find another solution that is easier for me, which can provide what I currently have in Panda Adaptive Defense 360."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price was fine."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"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 am using the Community edition."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"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."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"Price-wise, Sangfor Endpoint Secure can be considered a competitively priced product in the market as it offers quite low prices compared to other solutions."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"The price is excellent."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
884,012 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%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Hospitality Company
5%
 

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 Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise2
 

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 needs improvement with Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered. It would be better if it were a simplified version with fewe...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure is easy to handle with its user-friendly interface. The four engines it utilizes for endpoint...
What advice do you have for others considering Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
At first, people might not understand the interface, which is why it should be simplified. However, once they underst...
What do you like most about WatchGuard EPDR?
The product's most valuable features are the zero-trust application service and its capability to detect threats and ...
What needs improvement with WatchGuard EPDR?
I would not be able to say what areas of WatchGuard EPDR have improved, as I do not work with the product myself so m...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about Sangfor Endpoint Secure vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.