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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Cisco Secure Workload comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (34th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (25th)
Cisco Secure Workload
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (8th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (15th), Microsegmentation Software (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Cisco Security Portfolio category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Endpoint is 9.3%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Workload is 6.2%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cisco Security Portfolio Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Endpoint9.3%
Cisco Secure Workload6.2%
Other84.5%
Cisco Security Portfolio
 

Featured Reviews

JavedHashmi - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Technology Officer at Future Point Technologies
Reliable threat protection is achieved while integration and analysis capabilities need refinement
Cisco Secure Endpoint is very good in machine learning, which allows it to secure offline contents even if not connected to the internet. We haven't encountered a single breach after it's deployed. It controls USB devices and has a separate antivirus solution called Tetra, providing security even for real-time, day-zero attacks through its strong Talos threat intelligence platform.
Raj Metkar - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Head of Networks at MUFG, EMEA
Discover internal application dependencies and create a dependency map
We actively seek improvements in integrating the Infoblox DDI platform with Cisco Secure Workload. This integration allows Cisco Secure Workload to learn about our networks and network tags, providing valuable insights into vulnerabilities related to the operating system and various applications installed on our servers. Recently, Cisco announced a new product called HyperShield, an AI-based autonomous micro-segmentation solution. While Cisco has not stated that HyperShield will replace Cisco Secure Workload, it represents a natural evolution for the company. HyperShield features dynamic policy discovery and enforcement; however, once policies are enforced, they do not change until a discovery occurs, requiring a re-enforcement process. This new platform operates autonomously, minimizing the need for user or security engineer intervention. I would have expected Cisco to incorporate more automatic discovery and enforcement features within the existing Cisco Secure Workload product. Instead of enhancing the current product, they have introduced a new solution. Cisco plans to honor existing Tetration licenses, allowing users to transition to HyperShield without additional costs, reflecting the investment enterprises have already made. From Cisco’s perspective, this represents a natural progression in their product line. While the product name changes, it seems more of a rebranding effort. The enhancements are greater autonomy, improved discovery, and automatic enforcement, which are now being introduced in HyperShield. Cisco Secure Workload offers automatic policy enforcement but cannot adjust policies dynamically as the application needs to change. Having used the platform for the past five years, the recent announcement has been reassuring. Cisco has confirmed that our investment in the platform will not go to waste. They will honor our existing licenses, providing a natural migration path to the new solution without any disruption

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are estimating 5 to 10 percent staff productivity increases."
"The most valuable feature at this moment is that Cisco AMP or Cisco Secure Endpoint solution is delivering a lot of things, and I always say to a lot of customers that if we didn't have Cisco AMP, we probably would have had ransomware somewhere. So, it's protecting us very well from a lot of hackers, malware, and especially ransomware."
"I'm only using the AMP (advanced malware protection) which is protecting my file system from all the malicious things that might happen. It should protect all kinds of things that might happen on the servers, things that I cannot see."
"The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. So, that's the most important feature for me."
"Scalability wise, AMP is a sure shot recommendation."
"AMP and the rest of the security stack from Cisco give me peace of mind that the network is taking care of itself and that the endpoints are protected."
"This solution has allowed us to segment the organization to provide better security."
"With Cisco AMP, Threat Response, and Orbital, we are 100 percent certain that we got every trace of malicious software."
"The solution offers 100% telemetry coverage; the telemetry you collect is not sampled, it's not intermittent, it's complete, and you see everything in it, including full visibility of all activities on your endpoints and in your network."
"A complete and powerful micro-segmentation solution."
"The solution is very user-friendly, which clients appreciate."
"The scalability of Cisco Tetration is very good."
"By using Tetration insight, we are able to get the latency on our level accounts and we can determine whatever the issue is with the application latency itself."
"It's stable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don't have to do packet captures on the network."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"In terms of the user experience, if the UX design could be much simpler [that would improve things]... if they could make it more intuitive for someone who is not an engineer so that they still can read what's going on in their webpage and understand, that would be something."
"I would like them to add whatever makes filtering more advanced in scanning and blocking for malware in emails."
"Logging could be better in terms of sending more logs to Cisco Firepower or Cisco ASA. That's an area where it could be made better."
"Previously, there were options to uninstall the agent without a password if you had admin access, and this could be improved."
"It could be improved in connection with artificial intelligence and IoT."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem."
"The problem is that we can only deploy the particular solution where we have the hardware with Cisco."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem."
"The product should be easy to use, but it is not. Comparing it to other products, it was very complex."
"They should scale down the hardware a bit. The initial hardware investment is two million dollars so it's a price point problem. The issue with the price comes from the fact that you have to have it with enormous storage and enormous computes."
"The scalability of this solution needs to be improved."
"Secure Workload is a little complicated to use, and the dashboard isn't intuitive, so it takes a while to learn how to use it."
"Cisco Tetration needs more flags and system alerts that we should get with network capture."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"The price is very good."
"Cisco's pricing is reasonable. We also do not need to opt for niche players, which would have charged us significantly more than Cisco for ecosystem solutions. We are highly satisfied with the pricing structure of Cisco's solutions they are reasonable."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"The price is outrageous. If you have money to throw at the product, then do it."
"The price is based on how many computers you're going to install it on."
"It is not cheap and pricing may limit scalability."
"The cost for the hardware is around 300k."
"Pricing depends on the scope of the application and the features. Larger installations save more."
"The pricing is a bit higher than we anticipated."
"Regarding price, Cisco Secure Workload can be expensive if you don't have a budget. If you're not doing micro-segmentation, every extra security measure or enforcement you're putting on top of your existing environment will be an extra cost. It's not a cheap solution at all. But from my point of view, if you need to do micro-segmentation, this is one of the best tools I've seen for it. I can't compare that to Microsoft's solution because I haven't looked into it. I've looked into VMware and Cisco. Those are the only two that I know of. I didn't know that Microsoft could do micro-segmentation at all. Maybe they can, but I haven't heard anything about it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cisco Security Portfolio solutions are best for your needs.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Endpoint?
The product's initial setup phase was very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco is aggressive in pricing, making it competitive and sometimes even cheaper than other good products like CrowdStrike, Microsoft Defender, or SentinelOne.
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco Secure Endpoint lacks features like DLP which other vendors offer. XDR is new, so integration capabilities with third-party tools need improvement. The forensic capabilities need enhancement,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Workload?
CloudStrike offers antivirus capabilities and firewall features for servers and VDI but lacks automatic policy discovery. This raises questions about the resources required to discover and write po...
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Workload?
We actively seek improvements in integrating the Infoblox DDI platform with Cisco Secure Workload. This integration allows Cisco Secure Workload to learn about our networks and network tags, provid...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Workload?
When we onboarded Cisco Secure Workload, the usual use case was to discover internal application dependencies and create a dependency map for Cisco ACI. As the network team, we chose to implement A...
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Cisco Tetration
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
ADP, University of North Carolina Charlotte (UNCC)
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cisco Secure Workload and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.