We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The stability is very good."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"It integrates well into the environment."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"Both incoming and outgoing traffic is protected."
"On the cloud management page, the solution scales up very highly."
"F-Secure is useful for keeping user machines up-to-date by pushing out security and critical updates."
"The notifications and patch management features are valuable."
"We use the product for detecting network vulnerabilities and for software update purposes."
"The most valuable features of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection are the clear useful portal and overall company protection."
"There is a layer of security to prevent a malicious agent (malware) from interrupting or stopping services, deleting or modifying registry entries or even stopping the antivirus from acting, ensuring that there will be no interruption of protection."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The support needs improvement."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"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."
"The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"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."
"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."
"Currently, we are monitoring all USB drives and ports but we would like to improve our device control capabilities."
"The program and cloud service management is in English. It's not a problem for me, however, it might be for users who don't speak English or use it regularly."
"But the biggest one for us is patch management because this has been our top priority when looking at alternatives. Every solution needs to have patch management, if that's possible. It would cut costs on our side if that feature were included, so we don't need to pay for two separate pieces of software."
"The solution could improve by having more real-time responses. For example, when a license gets removed from a computer it does not update the records of the change. Additionally, when I installed Microsoft Windows Defender I was not able to send licenses through email to our tenants. The integration with other solutions could improve."
"There could be a dedicated security partner with essential knowledge."
"There is no technical support available in the Middle East."
"I would like the part of Hash Analysis by external sources to be improved."
"Resource consumption is suboptimal and could be improved."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is ranked 37th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 7 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection writes "Good for pushing out security updates but it needs to add patch management". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Check Point Harmony Endpoint, whereas WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, Fortinet FortiClient, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. WithSecure Elements Endpoint Protection report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.