No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BigFix vs Nyotron PARANOID comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BigFix
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
100
Ranking in other categories
Configuration Management (10th), Patch Management (7th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (10th), Autonomous Endpoint Management (5th)
Nyotron PARANOID
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
58th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 BigFix is 1.7%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nyotron PARANOID is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.9%
BigFix1.7%
Nyotron PARANOID0.5%
Other93.9%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
InderjeetSingh4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Administrator at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
End-to-end automation has simplified patching and software deployment across thousands of servers
There is one feature in BigFix called the automation patch policy that requires enhancement. When an action is initiated through the patch policy, it appears on the console but arrives in chunks. When targeting hundreds of servers from the patch policy, the actions come in chunks such as ten out of six, ten out of nine, or ten out of fifteen. This fragmented approach creates a significant challenge for the patching team to monitor the action status. I would recommend that the development team provide a single action or one to two actions instead of multiple actions requiring individual monitoring. A broad status update could be provided to the client indicating the overall progress of the patch policy implementation rather than requiring monitoring of every individual action. This would reduce the bandwidth required by the team to track multiple actions on the console.
Abel Browarnik - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Expertos Browarnik
A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection
The initial setup is complex. It is rare to see an effective endpoint protection system that does not require some effort. It is neither on the cloud nor on-premises. You deploy it on every endpoint or server, irrespective of perimeter. You must use a deployment tool unless you prefer to do it manually on every endpoint or server. We used an automation tool to deploy it. Since we had MSI with us. We had to verify that everything worked, but it didn't take more than two weeks for 1000 endpoints.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for."
"It detected stuff that other things wouldn't detect."
"One of the things that I enjoy the most is using policy extensions. It's like having host firewalls to control USB connections. I think it's a wonderful tool to restrict use when connecting to our computers. Another important tool is Home Insights. That is an add-on to the Cortex solution. I like that because we can see all the vulnerabilities in the environment and control what assets are connected to our network."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"The scalability of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very good."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"BigFix can manage lost devices, so you can wipe them remotely to ensure the IP doesn't get out in public. Unified endpoint security is a new perspective. I know that HCL is also collaborating with IBM, but I'm not sure if there is any cooperation between them and MaaS360 or other endpoint components."
"It's easy to use, not complicated."
"The BigFix features that have proven most effective include inventory, software delivery, software distribution, software catalog, and both software and hardware management."
"It is a highly effective tool if you're cross-platform."
"The most valuable feature of BigFix is the reporting tool and patching Windows."
"Definitely, without any hesitation, I would recommend that you should implement and use it."
"The most valuable point is when you deploy an application, you have to make sure that the application has been deployed to all computers and that is working perfectly. This solution works well at deployments."
"Patch management is no longer a problem."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"First of all, it does the job. It prevents harm to the operating system. Also, the visibility it gives to the user and to the administrator is very good."
"This product really is the best solution for this security issue."
 

Cons

"If you compare it to SentinelOne, which has more functionalities and detection capabilities on an open platform, the pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"We had a problem with getting our older endpoints up to date, but their newest updates have been really good. I've been pleased with it in terms of what our needs are. It's doing what we want it to do."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"Around the scalability concern, I would like to see the ability to run teamed, clustered, or hierarchical root servers, in order to provide a more robust, high availability system. The single monolithic root server model does somewhat bother me."
"Sometimes there can be a delay reporting back to the server for a variety of reasons, such as users turning their computer off when they go home."
"We have had scalability issues because we bend the laws of the physics for the tool."
"A major feature that I think they need to add to Detect is application whitelisting."
"They don't have a proper mobile device management capability."
"Sometimes there is a lag time for our users."
"They don't have a proper mobile device management capability. They're working on it, however, that's the one thing that needs improvement so that you can have full unified endpoint management."
"The first setup was complex."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers. Currently it's only protecting the client side, not the server. If they would add the server in the same solution, that would be great."
"The solution should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the product is not very economical."
"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."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"You get what we call the Platform Edition, which you get for free. The patch service is maybe $0.50 per workstation per month. Then there's the basic server cost, which is about $1.50 per server per month. You also get into Lifecycle which does power management, OSD remote control, and those types of things, and that might be about 10 times the price - which works out to about $13 per server and, maybe $5 per workstation per month."
"We have a subscription-based contract with BigFix."
"I would stay with the Managed Virtual Server license model, which is a 1-to-1 license per OS whether it is virtual or physical."
"It is too costly. It is one of the best tools, but because of pricing, not all clients support it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The price of the solution is high. There are not any additional fees from the standard license."
"The price of BigFix could be lower. However, I am always seeking a lower price."
"It might be about $23 a client."
"The product is less costly when compared to other solutions, and this is a good solid solution for what we have paid."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Construction Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise68
No data available
 

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. ...
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...
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,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BigFix?
I rate the price for BigFix as medium, neither low nor high.
What needs improvement with BigFix?
There is one feature in BigFix called the automation patch policy that requires enhancement. When an action is initia...
What is your primary use case for BigFix?
My current use case involves being one of the products and one of the clients implementing this tool.
What needs improvement with Nyotron PARANOID?
There was an initial problem, we had to run the system in detection mode rather than prevention mode. The solution sh...
What is your primary use case for Nyotron PARANOID?
We use Nyotron PARANOID to protect endpoints. It serves as a second and last line of protection. It often detects thr...
What advice do you have for others considering Nyotron PARANOID?
They pushed updates frequently. Sometimes, an update breaks functionality, but it is easy to fix. It was an excellent...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Tivoli Endpoint Manager
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
US Foods, Penn State, St Vincent's Health US Foods, Sabadell Bank, SunTrust, Australia Sydney, Stemac, Capgemini, WNS Global Services, Jebsen & Jessen, CenterBeam, Strauss, Christian Hospital Centre, Brit Insurance, Career Education Corporation
El Al Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about BigFix vs. Nyotron PARANOID and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.