Automox vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Automox and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Automox is ranked #21 with an average rating of 8.7, while OpenText is ranked #32. Automox holds a 0.5% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.8% 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: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 915,341 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 October 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.8%, 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	3.8%
Automox	0.5%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.8%
Other	93.9%

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

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

"It detected stuff that other things wouldn't detect."

"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."

"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management; Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very easy to work with, and we're quite happy with them."

"Stability-wise, it is good; I did not hear about any issues in terms of stability, and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can be trusted completely."

"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."

"The dashboard is customizable."

"From a single pane of glass, you can easily manage all of your endpoints."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"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 has eased our operations; it is very simple to use and does not have heavy workflows."

"The biggest improvement to our organization involves the reduction in its man hours... We've probably saved hundreds of hours."

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

"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."

"Its flexibility is most valuable."

"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."

"They've been adding some new features lately, which I'm not nearly as familiar with, but the ability to just deploy patches and exempt certain machines from certain patches is helpful. For instance, for our servers, we may not want to roll out zero-day patches. We are able to exempt those and make sure that they don't get those policies. We've got certain servers that have to run a particular version of Java, and being able to exempt those servers from receiving Java updates is pretty fantastic."

More Automox pros

"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."

"Customer Service: Top-of-the-line; the busy community as well. Technical Support: Top-of-the-line; the busy community as well."

"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."

"Webroot pioneered integration of novel concepts in endpoint protection."

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is that they have the lightest agent, as it is only six MBs, installs in a matter of seconds, is very lightweight, and has a very minimal, negligible performance impact on the machine and endpoints."

"There aren't any features that really stand out — I just want it to keep malware out of my system. To date, I haven't had any malware in my system."

"The ability to generate profiles specific to both business groups and organizations has made managing nearly 1000 endpoints very simple."

"It is excellent endpoint protection for mobiles that does everything it says it will."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"The deployment is pretty hard."

"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."

"One thing that was missing was the integration part. Currently, they don't have out-of-box integration with IBM QRadar, or if they have the integration, the integration doesn't work well."

"For Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, if I had to point out improvements, I would say the UI is still somewhat difficult for beginners."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."

"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 configuration could be simplified. I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications."

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

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"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."

"I think Automox can be improved by providing more advanced reporting and analytics, with greater customization of dashboards and compliance reports."

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

"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."

"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. 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."

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

More Automox cons

"Their customer support should be better. We started having some issues with it, and we didn't get the required support."

"Reporting system could be improved."

"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."

"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 needs to improve the problems with the faster connection, and have a huge reduction in false positives."

"I did notice that my OS slowed down, but I don't know if that's due to Webroot."

"There is one thing that is deplorable with the product that I would change as soon as I found a better one. However, the reports are worthless."

"It doesn't do anything proactive. The virus has to hit the machine before it detects it."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."

"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."

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

"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."

"The tool's price is moderate."

"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."

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.""

"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."

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

"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 product is a great value."

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

"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."

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."

"It is relatively cheap."

"The pricing is high."

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

"The solution is pretty cheap, actually. At our level, which is at 2,500 endpoints, we're paying 87 cents an agent per month."

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

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

"If you purchase for clients, then you are the managing billing entity. It's better to either get a monthly subscription check from your clients, or to prepay for the year (so as to not keep cash in reserve to pay the bill each month) IMHO."

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

915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Outsourcing Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Construction Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

12%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	47
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	55

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	12

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?

Our experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was very pleasant.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Automox?

I cannot think of anything specific for how Automox can be improved. An AI worklet builder would be a possibility, bu...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Automox?

My main use case for Automox involves patching Windows and Linux servers, Windows endpoints, and maintaining configur...

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 15% 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

Tanium vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Configuration Manager vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

BigFix vs Automox

Compared 5% of the time

Rapid7 Metasploit vs Automox

Compared 5% 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

Symantec Endpoint Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 3% of the time

WatchGuard EPDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 1% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

October 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Automox

October 2026

Download Automox product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

September 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

September 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: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

915,341 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.