Automox vs HP Wolf Security comparison

Automox and HP are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Automox is ranked #36 with an average rating of 9.0, while HP is ranked #18. Automox holds a 0.2% mindshare in EPP, compared to HP’s 5.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Automox users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of HP users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

HP Wolf Security and Automox compete in the cybersecurity market. HP Wolf Security seems to have the upper hand in security features with advanced threat detection, while Automox stands out in ease of use and customer support.

Features: HP Wolf Security offers advanced threat detection, isolation capabilities, and comprehensive protection. Automox provides automated patch management, flexibility in endpoint security, and user-friendly interface.

Room for Improvement: HP Wolf Security could improve integration with other tools, reduce performance impacts during scans, and enhance reporting capabilities. Automox needs better reporting, faster system speed, and more integration options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HP Wolf Security is straightforward to deploy but needs significant ongoing management with mixed reviews on customer service. Automox has a streamlined deployment process with highly rated customer service for responsiveness and helpfulness.

Pricing and ROI: HP Wolf Security has a higher setup cost but satisfactory ROI due to comprehensive protection. Automox has a lower setup cost and significant ROI as automated features save time and resources.

To learn more, read our detailed Automox vs. HP Wolf Security Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. HP Wolf Security

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,376 peers since 2012

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...

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 Automox is 0.2%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HP Wolf Security is 5.0%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.5%
HP Wolf Security	5.0%
Automox	0.2%
Other	91.3%

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

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.

Read full review

Raphael Tiji

Senior Software Engineer at AT&T

Unified patching and remote access have strengthened security and reduced support overhead

Automox has significant potential and we truly appreciate its features and capabilities. However, we have encountered several performance issues, particularly with the remote access tool. We believe that with some improvement, it could replace other tools that we currently use. Exclusion for updates should be improved in Automox. Integration with Tenable vulnerability management should be improved, as it should be included. I do not have any other improvements needed for Automox that I have not mentioned yet, perhaps only small or wish-list features.

Read full review

Bert Hickman

Owner at Stoneridge Engineering, LLC

Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments

The tool's deployment is easy. HP Wolf Security's deployment was a swift process since it was initially compatible with Windows 10, the operating system on both machines. However, when I transitioned to Windows 11, I encountered minor issues that prompted me to delve deeper into Wolf Security to fine-tune security settings according to my preferences. While I mostly used default settings, there was an initial adjustment where I disabled the AI function related to malware. Currently, the system is running smoothly with no reported issues. Adjusting some settings raised concerns about compatibility between HP Wolf Security and Norton 360. Specifically, aspects of HP Wolf Security, such as the virtual machine component, intrigued me, but I hesitated due to potential conflicts. During my investigation, Windows 11 raised a flag, questioning the system's security settings with Norton 360 and HP Wolf Security. However, it seems that they coexist well without causing issues.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have found in our test Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to be a very good tool."

"The product is very good, it has caught a lot of exploits that most products would not."

"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."

"But overall, when we speak about security and protection, they are one of the top providers."

"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."

"Overall, it's a great platform; it integrates very well with other solutions from Palo Alto and also with our vendors, the ease of use is excellent, I love the root cause analysis from Cortex, which is amazing, and in a few clicks you can have the full root cause."

"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."

"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."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"Having Automox allows us to bother people less, fix things faster, and generally be a better managed services provider providing better service."

"Automox's real-time visibility and control through its intuitive dashboard is important for our response to emerging threats because it tells us which applications need to be updated on a real-time basis."

"Automox is the only one that we've found that we can just set and then forget; it simply works and is the best."

"We love the overall patch management abilities; it's the main driver of why we adopted Automox, and it has definitely stood up to the test of time."

"The flexibility in creating tools to make changes on remote machines is most valuable to me. The reporting feature is also fantastic because on any given day I can bring up a list of machines that don't have patches, for example. Or I can bring up a list of machines that are in my environment on a certain day. The solution helps me with not only my own role, and what I look for internally myself, but it also helps during audits. I can go in and look at the number of machines in there, and their owners and timelines. It certainly helps tell a story for anything that IT requires."

"I am a strong proponent of Automox; it's a huge time-saver, it's accurate, it's easier to use, and it's way more stable than any endpoint security add-on."

"Automox is without a doubt the easiest patching tool I have ever used."

More Automox pros

"We've been able to isolate and prevent malicious code from external email attachments and from downloaded internet files. Those are the two big areas that have really made an impact."

"It has reduced the number of virus and malware incidents and calls we have received compared to prior to deploying this product, and our overall security posture has improved."

"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack."

"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."

"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."

"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."

"Looking at it in the big picture of the risk that you're mitigating and the protection that you're getting, it's phenomenal."

"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."

More HP Wolf Security pros

Cons

"Additionally, I think the price is very high, and if it can be adjusted, I believe it will be a very good solution."

"The downside to the solution is that there are a large number of false positives."

"However, if you do not have Palo Alto in your environment, you are paying these additional services just for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, so it is not a cost-effective solution."

"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."

"Basically, they don't provide customer support tools just to investigate the logs."

"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."

"They are charging for Network Traffic Analyzer (NTA) services, so if the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better."

"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"I would add that remote support for iOS could be better, and remote support of Linux is also lacking."

"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository. Currently, all updates are provided directly from the internet. So, if you have 1,000 devices, all 1,000 devices go directly out to the internet. We would love the option of being able to put the updates on local storage so that we're not consuming as much bandwidth. That is literally the only thing that we've ever wanted."

"When we bring on a new client, we need to go into that client and manually set up my account, my chief engineer's account, three technicians' accounts, and a billing person's account all over again, which is annoying. We have probably up to 15 or 16 of our clients on Automox now. For every single one of those, we have had to go in and set this up. Then, if anything changes, we have to remember to go to Automox and change it 15 or 16 times. So, we just want inheritable permissions, and that is it. We have talked to them about this, and they are like, "Yeah, we hear a lot of complaints about it." I am thinking, "Guys, I have been complaining about this for a year and a half. When are you going to do it?" It must be some tricky thing or not an easy fix, because I can only assume if it were easy, then they would have done it by now."

"The biggest area they need to fix, without a doubt, is the ability to copy and sync profiles and worklets between all of the organizations you manage, and the ability to have top-level user access control across all of the companies that you manage."

"Automox needs some improvement, particularly in that remote support for Linux is lacking."

"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."

"Automox can be improved because the notification app sometimes gets stuck preparing to restart, which means users have to restart manually, and that is time-consuming."

More Automox cons

"Initially, when we came in contact with Bromium a few years ago, it had a nice threat analyst, or a LAVA Pop, which is what they used to call it. I would like to still see that on the individual machines because when we go out to look at a machine, we don't necessarily have access to the console."

"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms."

"They have always struggled with usability. The endpoint protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer."

"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"

"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data."

"I did not find this to be an out-of-the-box solution, it required planning and alignment across many groups."

"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability."

"When you deploy, not only is the user asked to reboot their computer, they are also asked to wait for 20 minutes while it sits there and initializes. It definitely impacts the end-user. It takes time away from their day."

More HP Wolf Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."

"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."

"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."

"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."

"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."

"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."

"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 pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"For all these software tools, it is usually a subscription model. There is a monthly charge that we need to pass along to our clients because we are doing all this for their benefit. It is only a couple of bucks a month per computer, and that is a low enough price point where our clients, without exception, have accepted it, and said, "This is great. We will pay that. It sounds like a worthwhile thing.""

"Its licensing for a year was nine grand. There was no additional fee."

"The pricing and licensing costs have been great for us... My advice to others who are evaluating or thinking of implementing Automox is to give it a shot. If a free trial is still available, definitely use it, because it makes life a lot easier."

"There are no additional costs in addition to the extended licensing fees with Automox. You get your support and your per endpoint license with what you purchased."

"The cost is very reasonable compared to the competition."

"The product is a great value."

"We are on the premium licensing, which is the one that has the API capability that we use."

"Automox just charges us a set amount per user, per month, for using the product. That is very important to us. Because it's a cloud-native solution, you're saving on the cost of hosting an on-premises solution on your servers."

More Automox pricing and cost advice

"Pricing is reasonable."

"I think the pricing is a good value. All of these security products are always going to be very expensive, but I don't think Bromium is unreasonable. I think Bromium is decently priced. It’s a tiered licensing platform. The more you buy, the cheaper gets per unit, and I think their tiers are very well defined. I think they're fair."

"The product's pricing is a good value. We only run it on our internet-facing workstations, we don't run it on everything in our environment. We are very selective. Some organizations may want to consider doing something like that to reduce their license count."

"The product came as a bundle with the machine."

"The pricing is very fair compared to the competition. The licensing is straightforward."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	44
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	47

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	5

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. ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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,...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Automox?

Automox needs some improvement, particularly in that remote support for Linux is lacking. Additionally, remote suppor...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Automox?

Our main use case for Automox is that we as a company need to be Cyber Security Plus compliant, and therefore we need...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Automox?

Automox is a modern, simple-to-use, and powerful tool that works well for all sizes of organizations that have a mix ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 9% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Complete vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 6% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

NinjaOne vs Automox

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Configuration Manager vs Automox

Compared 8% of the time

Tanium vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Intune vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

ManageEngine Endpoint Central vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

More Automox Competitors

Bitdefender Total Security vs HP Wolf Security

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs HP Wolf Security

Compared 12% of the time

Norton Small Business vs HP Wolf Security

Compared 9% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Business vs HP Wolf Security

Compared 6% of the time

McAfee Total Protection for Data Loss Prevention vs HP Wolf Security

Compared 5% of the time

More HP Wolf Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

March 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Automox

March 2026

Download Automox product report

Buyer's Guide

HP Wolf Security

March 2026

Download HP Wolf Security product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

No data available

Bromium vSentry

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

Facing growing threats and a rapidly expanding attack surface, understaffed and alert-fatigued organizations need more efficient ways to eliminate their exposure to vulnerabilities. Automox is a modern cyber hygiene platform that closes the aperture of attack by more than 80% with just half the effort of traditional solutions.

Cloud-based and globally available, Automox enforces OS & third-party patch management, security configurations, and custom scripting across Windows, Mac, and Linux from a single intuitive console. IT and SecOps can quickly gain control and share visibility of on-prem, remote and virtual endpoints without the need to deploy costly infrastructure.

Automox dramatically reduces corporate risk while raising operational efficiency to deliver best-in-class security outcomes, faster and with fewer resources.

Automox

HP Wolf Security is a comprehensive cybersecurity solution that bolsters your organization's cyber-resilience on multiple fronts. With its full-stack security approach, it ensures layered protection from hardware to the cloud, providing a robust defense against cyber threats. HP Wolf Security introduces endpoint isolation, a cutting-edge feature that effectively halts threats that may go unnoticed by Next-Generation Antivirus (NGAV) and Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) systems. Moreover, it extends its security coverage to printers, equipping them with advanced detection and self-healing capabilities to further safeguard your digital ecosystem. This integrated solution streamlines IT and security risk management, resulting in fewer alerts and false positives, and reduces the time and effort required for endpoint incident analysis and remediation. Notably, HP Wolf Security prioritizes productivity, allowing you to manage risk without disrupting the user experience, enabling worry-free work from anywhere, and offering rapid IT disaster recovery at scale.

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Information Not Available

Valspar

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. HP Wolf Security

March 2026

Free Report: Automox vs. HP Wolf Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Automox vs. HP Wolf Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Automox vs. HP Wolf Security 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.