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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
32nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
35th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (29th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.0%, up from 0.8% 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 Networks3.7%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.5%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.0%
Other93.8%
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.
Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Operations Manager at Philips
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.
Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research Development and Innovation at CSIR
Offers useful threat hunting and response capabilities but struggles to justify cost for smaller deployments
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR components; I also get involved with some of the XDR components, especially for the cloud. Regarding analysis features, such as deep behavioral detection, I do use it sometimes; I usually don't use the automated version of it, as I prefer threat hunting directly, depending on if the season is available. I know some of them have pretty good analytics engines, but I tend to do the threat hunting on my own. I manage incident response for a bunch of companies, so some of them have Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response integrated into Sentinel, some into Fortinet, and others into various tools. When considering cost-effectiveness, their pricing structure works such that if you're a large organization with more than a thousand endpoints to deploy to, then Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is worthwhile. But for anything less than 300, it's too expensive; obviously, the more you buy, the better the price, making it cheaper for you. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response best fits enterprise-level businesses such as huge corporations; however, we are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment. We're trying to see how we can improve it with some of our clients, but at the moment, it's struggling compared to other EDR solutions that we have deployed. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response a six.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The normal protection was really effective, and we detected situations that if we didn't have Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it's highly likely that we would have been affected, but it protected the infrastructure."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"Palo Alto Networks Traps improves our security posture and lowers risk by providing next-gen methods to combat against modern threats on all the major platforms."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"I have found the solution to be very easy in respect of the integration and configurable."
"It is an easy-to-use tool."
"Cortex XDR is a very capable solution for protecting large networks and a lot of endpoints. It's very useful because the automation is very high, and if you combine it with the features on Palo Alto firewalls, it provides very strong protection."
"The product works pretty well; it does a good job catching viruses, and while we haven't had a chance to test against any kind of ransomware attack, I know it works great and I'm not worried about its capabilities in that respect."
"From an administrative overhead point of view, there is a 75% reduction in administrating the solution."
"Specifically for a Windows domain environment, the product can be customized and pushed via GPO or SCCM without issue.​"
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"In most cases, the solution's ability to detect in the MITRE framework, and its ability to be able to detect attacks in any one of seven or eight different areas of the life cycle of an attack is very useful."
"What I like best about CylancePROTECT is its accuracy, as it doesn't give many false positives."
"The solution is pretty easy to scale."
"The solution is stable."
"I highly recommend this solution for any organization that is solely depending on normal AV."
"Cybereason is helpful to organizations with a small security team, and with a single portal to manage and with it being a cloud portal, it really reduces the amount of overhead versus having a traditional on-prem solution."
"Please go for it as this is an efficient product in the cyber security space."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"For me, the technical support is good."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"To get my Cybereason instance up and running, I just install it; it takes less than a minute or two to actually install and run the installer."
 

Cons

"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"There are some limitations on the Traps agents."
"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."
"The product needs to continue to offer better alerts, in particular around false positives, and it needs to reduce them from happening."
"rom my experience interacting with the primary or the central administrative console, it's quite complex. You would need a fair bit of technical experience to set it up, implement and maintain it. That would be one area for improvement."
"The price for this EPP platform is expensive and could be improved."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"The AI of CylancePROTECT has room for improvement. I'm on a trial license of SentinelOne, and its AI is much better than what's on CylancePROTECT."
"I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line."
"The initial deployment was quite complicated."
"The user interface could be improved, it's very outdated."
"One area for improvement is that this solution isn't so easy for the end-user, especially at level 1."
"There is room for improvement in the product features related to device control, particularly USB management."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"I am using the Community edition."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"We would just add more if there are new users, but right now you just need one license for per user."
"The licensing part of the product is too expensive compared to other solutions in the market."
"Review closely how many endpoints you actually need before buying into a pricing level. Deal and deal with the VAR of your choice."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"We pay our license on a yearly basis and have just renewed for two years."
"​Shop around for sure and be assured the price you pay will be close to other solutions available, but even at a slight mark-up from the other solutions, you are getting real endpoint protection versus nothing more than a cheap security blanket that might keep you warm at night."
"CylancePROTECT is worth the money, but I'm not sure of its exact price. I can't remember off the top of my head."
"Currently, we have competitive pricing for Cylance, which is affordable enough to consider."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"The pricing is manageable."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
 

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 Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we conta...
What is your primary use case for Blackberry Protect?
I am using CylancePROTECT as an active learning algorithm. We installed it on almost 20,000 servers and virtual machi...
What is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,838 professionals have used our research since 2012.