Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (9th), Cisco Security Portfolio (7th)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.5%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 4.4%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Unique Categories:
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
1.8%
Cisco Security Portfolio
7.1%
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
8.7%
Ransomware Protection
20.0%
 

Featured Reviews

CK
Aug 9, 2023
A security solution to protect the endpoints with centralized management
We use this solution to protect our IT environment. We use it to secure our user endpoints It gives awareness of our users' security posture. The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. That's the most important feature…
Vikas Gawali - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 11, 2024
Has valuable AI-driven threat detection capabilities and good technical support services
Our primary use case for Cortex XDR is endpoint detection and response (EDR) across our enterprise environment, which includes over 1000 endpoints distributed globally. We use it to monitor and protect against advanced threats, perform real-time threat hunting, and streamline incident response…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"The best feature that we found most valuable, is actually the security product for the endpoint, formerly known as AMP. It has behavioral analytics, so you can be more proactive toward zero-day threats. I found that quite good."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"It provides real-time visibility and control over endpoints, allowing its users to promptly respond to any security incidents and remediate any vulnerabilities."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this product is that there is a lot more malware slipping through my email filters than I expected."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"If there are multiple alerts, the app will automatically create and rate an event instead of going through each one."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"Cortex XDR is a simple platform that's easy for administrators and users. You have a lot of flexibility to change or customize the features."
"The product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
 

Cons

"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"This product has issues with the number of false positives that it reports."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"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."
"We would like to have an API integration with a SIEM solution, because as far as I know, it currently hasn't yet been released."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"The price could be a little lower."
"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."
"In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."
"It'll help if customization was easier."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a big issue."
"​Pricing can be more expensive than similar software that does less functionality, but not recognized by customers.​"
"You must make monthly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. There are no extra charges apart from the standard licensing fees associated with the product."
"The price is very good."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"Cisco Secure Endpoint is not too expensive and it's not cheap. It's quite fair."
"It is a subscription-based product."
"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."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"I am using the Community edition."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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. The ability to reverse damage caused by ransomware with minimal interruptions to...
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 that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
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, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
 

Also Known As

Cisco AMP for Endpoints
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: July 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.