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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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
114
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
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Compliance (5th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (21st), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 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 BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum is 2.2%, down from 3.5% 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 Networks3.8%
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum2.2%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.5%
Other92.5%
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.
SR
Group CIO at Thal Industries Corporation Ltd
Have maintained strong endpoint protection through behavioral analysis and daily monitoring
I previously mentioned that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business doesn't have built-in DLP, which was a concern. I think they could add it in the future; however, antivirus cannot provide a proper DLP solution, but they can offer a mix of DLP, similar to Trend Micro Apex One, which provides some sort of DLP file management. Nonetheless, we need a proper DLP solution such as Forcepoint or Symantec, whichever suits us. We'll be conducting performance evaluation in the next quarter while working on other projects. More value means a better GUI, user interface, and comprehensive reporting capabilities. In Sophos, we receive a daily system-generated report about what is happening, plus an alert system. The reporting system in Trend Micro is also excellent; I receive an email every day at 10:00 AM with a report for the last 24 hours.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They did what they said, and this solution could apply to any scenario."
"Palo Alto is the best security solution in the market."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"The product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Their XDR agent and their behavioral indicators of compromise (BIOC) are pretty nice. Their managed threat hunting is also pretty nice. They also have WildFire, which is a service for actively looking for malware. It's quite useful."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"​Very easy to deploy. It can be done one by one or deployed by customizing an MSI file for GPO push.​"
"This technology is very good, very stable, and we have great trust in it and what it delivers."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"The non-daily requirement to update signatures is the most valuable feature. From a functional point of view, it is pretty spot on. For instance, we compared an algorithm from five years ago to today's algorithm, and it was 98% accurate. It has the ability to detect and mitigate. In the industrial environment that we work in, there's what we call OT versus IT. You are IT Central, but this is OT. Generally, we don't have the same level of skillset as IT individuals or IT professionals have. This particular product doesn't require you to be a computer scientist to be able to understand its proprietary algorithm and to be able to deploy, use, and work within it. It integrates well with a robust SIEM or SOAR solution, and it plays nice with others. We use other detection solutions like CyberX or site provision with Cisco, and it plays nice. That's one of the things we really liked about it."
"It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessary actions."
"One of the best features of the solution is that it's easy to deploy."
"Endpoints are protected in real-time without the need of a centralized server, whitelist, or the ability to connect to a central host in the cloud."
"A user can continue to add endpoints and the solution will continue to perform well."
"It has a very good firewall, which lets you isolate your devices depending on the groups."
"In my experience, Kaspersky products have comprehensive and quick zero-day response for global and local (Indonesia) threats, including spam, Trojans, worms, etc."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is easy to implement and has a user-friendly interface."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business's most valuable feature is the ease of management."
"The best features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business are the file threat protection, web threat protection, mail threat protection, network threat protection, firewall, behavior detection, and exploit prevention."
"The interface is really good. It's nice and simple."
"It offers very good security protection."
"After almost ten years of use by a client, Kaspersky has not allowed any penetration of ransomware or any other viruses."
 

Cons

"However, if you do not have Palo Alto in your environment, you are paying these additional services just for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, so it is not a cost-effective solution."
"There are some limitations on the Traps agents."
"The only issues that we have are, one the cost, two the dashboard is not very intuitive, even though you can drill down within the dashboard, we usually have to gather information from other sources to determine locations and if its a false positive."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."
"The solution should enhance the ADR and reporting."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"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."
"Reporting is an area with shortcomings in CylancePROTECT that needs to be improved."
"If they can add more features on top of their Persona feature that would be ideal."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"I would not rate this solution in the top five for things like presenting information, or ease of use."
"The management console needs a little maturity in how it presents data and allows the administrator to drill down or search across systems."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"The need to re-engineer the source code to reduce CPU and memory usage."
"The threat intelligence features are not up to date."
"The solution needs to lower its pricing."
"The initial setup is complex."
"There are times when Microsoft Windows's antivirus called Defender interferes with the functionality of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. There should be better integration with Windows."
"The training provided by the vendor to resellers and end users needs to be improved"
"The encryption feature could improve."
"I have some PCs with one gigabyte of RAM, and it's not easy to set up Kaspersky on these."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"I am using the Community edition."
"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 price was fine."
"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 pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"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."
"Review closely how many endpoints you actually need before buying into a pricing level. Deal and deal with the VAR of your choice."
"I think that the price we are paying is good for what it is."
"The initial end-point cost may seem a little high (~$55/device/year) but when you look at the total peace of mind that the solution provides, with no reboots for updates, and negligible performance impact, it is well worth it."
"The tool is not that expensive."
"We went through a third party initially to do the renewal, but we won't be renewing, we will move on to something else."
"CylancePROTECT's pricing is reasonable, at about €18 per user, per year."
"My company is on a yearly CylancePROTECT subscription. Price-wise, the solution is slightly expensive, so I'd rate it as eight out of ten."
"It is expensive, but not unreasonable."
"We purchase the product's yearly license. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"I don't remember exactly what the licenses cost, but it's not too expensive. It's affordable, especially when you are dealing with on-prem. However, I don't know about the new prices because we are in the process of buying support."
"It's a little more expensive compared to other competitors like Symantec."
"The licensing cost can be about $1,300 per year."
"The tool is expensive."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business is an expensive solution."
"The price is reasonable. We evaluated some other vendors, but Kaspersky charges less and offers more."
"It's an affordable security solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
903,871 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise53
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business63
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise33
 

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 needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Security?
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business does not have encryption tools. It uses the Windows BitLocker tool, which is...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business?
The pricing and licensing cost of Kaspersky Endpoint Security is cheaper compared to Trend Micro.
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business?
I have good experience in the sales part of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, not the technical side. I am no...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
Kaspersky Work Space Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
ACMS, Arqiva, Pakistan International Airlines, RAO UES
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
903,871 professionals have used our research since 2012.