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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs ESET Endpoint Encryption comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (32nd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (26th), Cisco Security Portfolio (8th)
ESET Endpoint Encryption
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Encryption (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Secure Endpoint1.3%
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint7.0%
CrowdStrike Falcon6.2%
Other85.5%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
Endpoint Encryption Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ESET Endpoint Encryption6.6%
Microsoft BitLocker16.5%
Symantec Endpoint Encryption8.1%
Other68.8%
Endpoint Encryption
 

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.
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.
AravindR - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Team Lead at Exalogic Consulting
Centralized encryption has secured all endpoints and has maintained compliance for remote devices
The best features of ESET Endpoint Encryption include full disk encryption, which is the most used one, ensuring all the endpoints are protected. I rely on this daily. Its main key focus on centralized management lets me monitor, enforce policies, and remediate issues from one console, and it allows for user-friendly deployment. Using ESET Endpoint Encryption has had a clear positive impact on my organization, especially in terms of security operational efficiency. From a security standpoint, I achieved 100% encryption coverage across all the endpoints, which significantly reduces the risk of data breaches due to lost or stolen devices. I also saw a noticeable drop in security incidents.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable."
"The solution's stability is generally good."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"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."
"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."
"We have been very happy with it."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"Device Trajectory is one of the most valuable features. We're able to dig in and really understand how things came to be and where to focus our efforts."
"appreciate the File Trajectory feature, as it's excellent for an analyst or mobile analyst. I can track everything that happens on our server from my PC or device. Integration with SecureX is a welcome feature because it connects Cisco's integrated security portfolio with our complete infrastructure. Sandboxing is helpful, and integration with the Cisco environment is excellent as we use many of their products, and that's very valuable for us."
"Scalability wise, AMP is a sure shot recommendation."
"Cisco has definitely improved our organization a lot. In terms of business, our company feels safer. We actually switched from legacy signature-based solutions to threat intelligence-based and machine learning-based solutions, which is Cisco Secure. This has improved our security significantly, from 10% of signature-based technology security to 99.9% of the current one which we are running. We were happy."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"The usability is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The tool does not slow down the computer."
"It is very secure and we have finally decided to use this after a thorough check. The interface is easy to navigate."
"The best features that ESET Endpoint Encryption offers are full disk encryption and drive encryption, which are part of the solution and which I rely on the most."
"The solution allows me to easily monitor the encryption and password management of multiple computers in my network and gives me visibility into user use."
"The most valuable feature of ESET Endpoint Encryption is its rate of capturing viruses and malware."
"I have used it in the past because it works quite well for encryption."
 

Cons

"This is a very costly product."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"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."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"The initial setup of Cisco Secure Endpoint is complex."
"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."
"It does not include encryption and decryption of local file shares."
"The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers, and we didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either."
"If you have issues with your network, you can't get updates, which is a problem."
"I would like to see better compatibility with mobile devices."
"I would like more robust reporting as part of the Remote Administrator."
"There are a few areas where ESET Endpoint Encryption could be better. The UX/UI could be more modern, and the management console feels a bit outdated and not very intuitive at times."
"The product should be more responsive regarding feedback if it detects something in our infrastructure. I believe there's a backend that their engineers use to detect viruses in our system. We would appreciate it if they could promptly provide feedback and give us recommendations on how to better protect our infrastructure beyond their system. Additionally, we hope for improved integration with the other systems we currently use. It would be beneficial if they could collaborate to create something that facilitates integration between these systems."
"The overall compatibility of the device is an area where the solution lacks."
"The solution should have better synchronization with active directory users and passwords for use in the encryption."
"I would like to see better compatibility with mobile devices. Most of the time, people are connecting to our server using their mobile device."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"This is an expensive solution."
"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."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"The price was fine."
"The pricing and licensing of the security solutions of Cisco are very good in comparison with the competitors, but sometimes, it's difficult to see all the discounts and other kinds of things. So, you have to be careful, but the pricing is good."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"Its price is fair for us."
"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."
"It can always be cheaper."
"Pricing is a big issue."
"It is quite cost-effective. I would rate it ten out of ten."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"There are some inexpensive products compared to ESET Endpoint Encryption, but they lack the essential features."
"Instead of installing ESET on each machine at each location, we just do it remotely. This has been a time saver for us."
"It is neither very expensive, nor cheap. Overall it is affordable and there is a long term arrangement between our company and the solution providers for license."
"We paid for an annual subscription, and it was reasonable."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and could be more cost-effective."
"Licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"The National University System dedicates 500 of their 5000 licenses to us, which is $14/yr per device. Most companies are paying $99 or $120 per device a year."
"ESET Endpoint Encryption is moderately priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
895,891 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise6
 

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 Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco is aggressive in pricing, making it competitive and sometimes even cheaper than other good products like CrowdS...
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...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
We deployed Cisco Secure Endpoint for our customers two to three years back. The use case was to secure their endpoin...
What needs improvement with ESET Endpoint Encryption?
ESET Endpoint Encryption could be better as I have experience with Trend Micro encryption, but there are multiple get...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
CCS Media Limited, Mercury Engineering, Unigarant, Pinewood Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Microsoft, SentinelOne and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: May 2026.
895,891 professionals have used our research since 2012.