Automox vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Automox and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Automox is ranked #35 with an average rating of 9.0, while OpenText is ranked #43. Automox holds a 0.3% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Automox users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and Automox are key players in the endpoint security market. Automox has the upper hand due to its comprehensive automated patch management and ease of deployment, and it offers more advantageous pricing.

Features: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers traffic security monitoring, endpoint security, and cloud-based detection for quicker threat response. It is lightweight, providing protection without hampering system performance. Automox features a cloud-based platform, automated patch management, and cross-platform compatibility. It simplifies endpoint management through a centralized console and supports diverse environments with effective policy management.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection requires enhancements in threat prevention, including stronger defenses against ransomware and phishing, and improved reporting with detailed documentation. Automox could benefit from better handling of multi-tenant environments, simpler policy management for multiple clients, and more robust remote support for Linux and iOS. Users also note the need for an offline mode and better notification controls.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products perform well in cloud environments. However, OpenText users report delays with support response times. Automox users generally experience effective customer service and gain additional assistance from its active community despite occasional response delays.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText is seen as affordable and offers multi-year licenses, providing good value for basic protection. Automox is praised for its cost-effectiveness and flexible pricing, frequently cited as more affordable than competitors. It offers substantial ROI through time and cost savings in endpoint management, bundling multiple features into one platform.

To learn more, read our detailed Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 894,738 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 May 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.5%, up from 0.7% 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	3.6%
Automox	0.3%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.5%
Other	94.6%

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

Naqash Ahmed

Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford

Automation has saved time and improves secure, centralized patching across all our devices

While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement. I want the custom reports to be even more detailed, specifically where I can add more details. It would be nice to have more filters in reports based on location and department more easily. Secondly, the notifications could be more customizable. Many times notifications come, but we don't have control over which notification is urgent and which is not. For example, if there's an alert of a critical update or pending approval, it can help me focus better. An alert of a security threat could be another type of notification that tells me something is important. Customized notifications would be much better. I would say the user interface could be improved as well. Some parts of the dashboard are a bit hard to understand. If they could be improved to be more intuitive, for example, if it could be easy to navigate between devices and reports, that would be great. I would say if Automox could also provide automation templates, that would help. I know there are templates, but I want more templates. Having ready-made worklets for common tasks can save a lot of time. Lastly, it should also support the interface for mobile screens.

Read full review

reviewer2584380

vCIO At Grove Networks Inc. at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

Improving threat detection is critical for enhanced protection

We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the contract we have with our clients as a cost-effective option for antivirus protection Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is cost-effective for rolling it out to all of our clients,…

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

"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."

"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."

"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."

"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."

"The solution's stability is generally good."

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

"The initial setup is easy."

"The most valuable features of this product are the management capabilities, which allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks, and its out-of-the-box investigation capabilities."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"Automox has positively impacted my organization with significant time-saving, improved our security posture by automatically patching vulnerabilities, and is easy to manage and deploy while offering Automox University as a great resource for learning the platform."

"Among the most valuable features are its ease of use and the Worklets. Both of them are time-savers. Worklets enable us to customize things for a given environment. It's something like when Apple lets other people create applications. Other peoples' Worklets can be used in our environment and in our customers' environments. That saves a lot of time, and it's really cool."

"Automox has saved us on multiple tasks at least 10 to 15 hours a week."

"The fact that it's just one product that can patch multiple operating systems is really great."

"Automox provides complete visibility for any laptop, desktop or server in our environment, regardless of whether the person is on the train, in the cloud or on the move."

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

"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."

"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."

More Automox pros

"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the fact that it is a low profile environment as far as overhead on the machines."

"The solution has many features. It is very easy to define and set the policies based on the user groups, it does not take up a lot of resources in operation, and has provided us with a good track record of protection."

"It monitors traffic and keeps us from getting ransomware or other viruses."

"The most valuable features of the solution include the endpoint navigation protection, the protection related to the EMS service, as well as the control and the cloud integration capabilities."

"We no longer have to worry about running scans as it is so lightweight and there is no user impact."

"The main reason we had Webroot is that it was cost-effective for our clients."

"Its ease of installation is valuable; it has been a low-resource tool and the continuous updates in the past have made it attractive from the standpoint of the trust level on the protection."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."

"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."

"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."

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

"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."

"It tends to do 99.9% of things. The only thing I'd like is single sign-on authentication into their cloud platform so that my users can be properly authenticated against it."

"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."

"A little bit more automation would be nice."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement."

"As concerns the patching concepts, there's a bit of a learning curve in terms of working out how Automox wants you to work within the console, not only splitting up everything into groups, but then having the various policies assigned."

"We would like to see additional detailed reporting for Service providers like us. We had to build our own reports via their APIs to meet our needs."

"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."

"It should have integrated workstation access. So, there should be a remote desktop feature."

"Asset management would be a great feature to add to Automox. We would run easier scripts or more out of the box scripts that would help us in audits. \"

"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."

More Automox cons

"Reporting system could be improved."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to focus on how they can widen their area of scope by not just being an antivirus tool anymore. The shortcoming in the customization area of the tool needs improvement."

"I think the one bad point about this product is that we did not find a way for Webroot to generate reports or schedule automatic reports to be sent to clients."

"Technical support is not the best. It's hard to get a hold of them if we need help. It's something that definitely needs improvement."

"The reporting is the weakest part of the Webroot console. Frequently, I export to Excel to massage something into it to pass on to others."

"I want Webroot to be easier to use and set up. It is not very intuitive."

"We need to know more details about how the virus interacted with the computer."

"The only complaint I have with Webroot is its inability to prevent UoD phishing and its inability to check against bots or block anti-attacks. Plus the URL server is in zero-definition."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."

"This is an expensive solution."

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."

"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very 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."

"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."

"It has a yearly renewal."

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"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 product is a great value."

"We're doing it annually directly through Automox. It is per endpoint. It is $2 and some change per endpoint, but I believe the cost is right around $28,000. Everything is covered in this fee."

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

"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.""

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

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

"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

"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."

"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."

"We evaluate other options using multiple choices, best value, management and functionality."

"Work on a price tier plan."

"The solution is very cost-effective."

"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."

"From a pricing standpoint, I would rate it a four out of five."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pricing and cost advice

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

894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Construction Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	46
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	49

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	11

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	35
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automox?

The cost is very affordable. We have been able to save a lot of time, approximately 30%. Cost reduction has been noti...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Automox?

Automox has significant potential and we truly appreciate its features and capabilities. However, we have encountered...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Automox?

Automox serves as a backbone tool for my company. We rely on Automox for application and operating system patching, w...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two ou...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's adverti...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the con...

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 9% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 5% 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 3% 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 8% of the time

Rapid7 Metasploit vs Automox

Compared 8% of the time

Tanium vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Configuration Manager vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Intune vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

More Automox Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 35% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 5% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 5% of the time

Malwarebytes Teams vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

May 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Automox

May 2026

Download Automox product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

April 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection report

Download OpenText Core Endpoint Protection product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

No data available

Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection

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

Automox offers automated patch management with cloud-native architecture, cross-platform compatibility, and ease of use. It provides real-time visibility and streamlines operations across Windows, macOS, and Linux, making it ideal for complex IT environments.

Automox empowers organizations with features like Worklets and remote management, enhancing security and efficiency through customizable patching policies, PowerShell script execution, and detailed reporting. It's primarily used for automated patch management, patch remediation, and compliance maintenance across diverse systems, ensuring cybersecurity and reducing vulnerabilities. Enhancements are desired for user access control, policy synchronization, and integration with tools like Tenable. Support for offline patching, rollback features, enhanced reporting, and notification customization are in demand. Improvements in cost effectiveness and multi-group policy applications are also suggested.

What are the key features of Automox?

Automated Patching: Streamlines updates across operating systems.
Cloud-Native Architecture: Offers real-time visibility and ease of use.
Cross-Platform Compatibility: Supports Windows, macOS, and Linux.
Worklets: Custom scripts for automating tasks.
Remote Management: Manage devices from anywhere.
Custom Patching Policies: Tailor updates for specific needs.
Insights Reporting: Generate detailed reports to enhance efficiency.

What benefits and ROI can users expect when evaluating Automox?

Time Efficiency: Saves time by automating complex tasks.
Increased Security: Enhances security through effective patch management.
Compliance: Maintains cybersecurity compliance.
Network Visibility: Provides comprehensive device network oversight.
Scalable Management: Handles extensive network updates effectively.

In industry applications, Automox is widely used for managing and updating vast fleets of devices, particularly in sectors requiring stringent cybersecurity measures. It ensures seamless operations through its centralized automation and management capabilities, making it essential for organizations handling extensive IT networks.

Automox

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers cloud-managed endpoint security with AI integration, providing real-time protection and lightweight performance. It ensures low system impact, seamless cloud integration, and cost-effective security solutions for various devices.

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is a comprehensive endpoint security platform utilized by managed-service providers for antivirus and firewall functionality across servers, workstations, and mobile devices. It employs AI for robust threat detection, integrating with cloud applications for real-time updates. Multi-layered security features include malware protection, network defense, and DNS protection. Although connectivity and threat reporting need improvement, this platform extensively supports remote device management and integrates efficiently with Active Directory policies.

What are the key features of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Cloud Management: Centralized admin console for easy oversight
AI Integration: Enhanced threat detection capabilities
Lightweight Performance: Minimal impact on system resources
Real-time Threat Database: Constant updates for effective protection
Web Control Interface: Monitors and controls web traffic

What benefits are associated with OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Ease of Setup and Maintenance: Facilitates quick deployment and upkeep
Seamless Cloud Integration: Simplifies scalability and operation
Cost-Effectiveness: Affordable pricing with comprehensive features
Mobile Security Capabilities: Supports remote device management

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection finds application in industries requiring stringent data protection and peace of mind over device security. Managed-service providers implement this for comprehensive antivirus and firewall features, safeguarding multi-device networks. It is particularly useful for DNS protection and integrating with Active Directory policies, enabling secure yet flexible operations across sectors.

OpenText

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Information Not Available

Mytech Partners

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

April 2026

Free Report: Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Find out what your peers are saying about Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Automox vs. OpenText Core 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.