Automox vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Automox and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Automox is ranked #37 with an average rating of 8.8, while OpenText is ranked #35. Automox holds a 0.4% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.7% 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: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 909,948 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 August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.7%, up from 0.8% 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	3.9%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.7%
Automox	0.4%
Other	94.0%

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

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is specifically designed to prevent zero-day attacks and is part of an ecosystem of Palo Alto, providing customers with a long-term vision to modify and redesign how security is applied in their company."

"These days it's machine-learning technology and behavior-based analytics features that make us more secure."

"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."

"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."

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

"It has absolutely improved the way our organization functions, we are more secure, it is giving us more peace of mind, and it has found malicious activity happening on our endpoints that probably would not have been detected if we didn't have it."

"I don't have to do much monitoring with it; I don't have to have anybody manually looking at this, it gives us reports, and it lets us know if something needs to be addressed, and we can easily address it."

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

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"It is a flexible solution that does a majority of the tasks."

"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational. When I took over patching at my company, they were using on-premise architecture to patch. As the workforce shifted from being in the office into their home offices, I was able to lift and shift with no effort other than deploying the new agent out into the environment."

"It's super easy to use and we haven't found anything easier."

"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."

"Out of all these features, if I had to pick one which I'm relying on the most, I would say the automatic patching, because it saves a lot of time and ensures all devices are updated."

"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."

"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."

"Previously, we would run a report, scan it, and compare it. We were spending 15 to 30 minutes a month on each machine on this stuff because you would find stuff that wasn't up to date, then you had to fix it. This solution takes that time down to minutes. Automox saves us easily many hours a month."

More Automox pros

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

"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."

"The solution is very light, works well on our PCs, the dashboard is very good, and we find the pricing to be very affordable."

"The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward."

"Low performance requirements."

"Previously, we used a mix of Trend/Sophos/Symantec. Webroot has all their best bits combined into one solution."

"Webroot's tech support is pretty good; they've given me some pointers."

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

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"Whenever the tool releases a new version when deploying the product across the organization, I feel like there are some disturbances in the CPU usage after upgrading the tool to the latest version."

"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."

"There are some false positives."

"This product has not improved my organization - in fact, we are in the process of moving back to another product as a result of Cortex's horrible impact on system performance."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."

"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."

"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."

"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"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."

"From an enterprise perspective, Automox could have better compliance reporting, which is needed for audit readiness, security reviews, and customer compliance evidence."

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

"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."

"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."

"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository."

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

"There should be better inventory capabilities; right now, they only allow you to have insight into software out-of-the-box, and it would be nice to also extend that into custom inventory that can be modified and managed by the practitioner."

More Automox cons

"We were attacked by CryptoLock. It didn't protect us in the way we needed to and an attack was able to get through their defenses."

"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower."

"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."

"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."

"It would be great if there was a feature which would allow you to scan an individual file on an endpoint user's computer."

"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."

"Tech support needs to be improved. If we have an issue, and we don't have an issue very often, trying to get support's attention is a really difficult endeavor."

"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."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."

"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."

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

"The tool's price is moderate."

"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."

"This is an expensive solution."

"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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.""

"The product is a great value."

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

More Automox pricing and cost advice

"Get a trial, then a multi-year license."

"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."

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

"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."

"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."

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

"With Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, I can select a yearly billing cycle."

"Work on a price tier plan."

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

909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

12%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

13%

Outsourcing Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	46
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	54

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?

From an enterprise perspective, Automox could have better compliance reporting, which is needed for audit readiness, ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Automox?

Automox is used in our system primarily to manage patch management. It helps in managing Windows updates, third-party...

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 13% 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

Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

NinjaOne vs Automox

Compared 9% of the time

Tanium vs Automox

Compared 8% of the time

Rapid7 Metasploit vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Configuration Manager vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

BigFix vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

More Automox Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 48% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 3% of the time

Cynet vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

August 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Automox

August 2026

Download Automox product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

August 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

August 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: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

909,948 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.