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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Uptycs 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
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
29th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
26th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Cisco Security Portfolio (9th)
Uptycs
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
65th
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
65th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (55th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (34th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (45th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (45th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (23rd), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (15th)
 

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 Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.3%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Uptycs is 0.4%, up from 0.1% 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%
Cisco Secure Endpoint1.3%
Uptycs0.4%
Other94.6%
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.
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.
SangramGupta - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at Deloitte USI
Centralized visibility has improved risk-based vulnerability management but onboarding still needs simplification
From my perspective, the features of Uptycs that stand out more for my projects and organization are the vulnerability management, endpoint visibility, and asset inventory management features. I can share two specific outcomes that show this positive impact using Uptycs. First, it reduces significant time and effort from the asset inventory point of view because previously I needed to scan all of the assets which were in scope, but now I only scan those assets that are currently active and in scope, and the CMDB and asset inventory receive proper updates of those assets. Secondly, in vulnerability prioritization, I receive all the prioritized vulnerabilities so I can prioritize and mitigate or remediate them as soon as possible, which reduces the overall time of remediation as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I don't have to do much monitoring with it; I don't have to have anybody manually looking at this, it gives us reports, and it lets us know if something needs to be addressed, and we can easily address it."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"When the pandemic started, Palo Alto came up with many solutions, which helped with the quick shift from on-premises to the cloud."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is specifically designed to prevent zero-day attacks and is part of an ecosystem of Palo Alto, providing customers with a long-term vision to modify and redesign how security is applied in their company."
"These days it's machine-learning technology and behavior-based analytics features that make us more secure."
"It is a simple platform to use."
"I like that the product has behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"The solution is easy to deploy and applies multi-factor authentication."
"Real-time threat prevention using sandboxing, file trajectory, and retrospective security."
"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."
"If you are looking for deep security and malware for your endpoint users and network then I would recommend Cisco AMP."
"Secure Endpoint has decreased our time to remediate by providing the tools and the integrations we need so we can quickly look across our entire network, look for those threats, and actually make good decisions."
"We are estimating 5 to 10 percent staff productivity increases."
"The integration with other Cisco products seemed to be really effective. We had Umbrella in place and we were using AnyConnect as well as Firepower. Once a threat was detected, being able to do the threat lookups and the live tracking was really useful."
"It's quite simple, and the advantage I see is that I get the trajectory of what happened inside the network, how a file has been transmitted to the workstation, and which files have got corrupted."
"They have multiple great features."
"I have seen a return on investment from using Uptycs, saving almost 25 to 30 percent in terms of asset investigations or asset inventory management and vulnerability prioritization, which is significant."
 

Cons

"This product has not improved my organization - in fact, we are in the process of moving back to another product as a result of Cortex's horrible impact on system performance."
"There is also no recovery feature; if some endpoint is under attack there must be the possibility of recovering it or restoring it to a normal state."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"If he is using a smaller company, he can depend on some other tools because Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a bit expensive."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"The negative aspect I see is the economic model used by Palo Alto."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"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 would like to have an API integration with a SIEM solution, because as far as I know, it currently hasn't yet been released."
"They could improve the main dashboard to more clearly show me the things that I want to see. When I open the dashboard right now, I see a million things and they are not always the things that I need."
"An easier way to do deduplication of machines, or be alerted to the fact that there's more than one instance of a machine, would be useful... That way you could get a more accurate device count, so you're not having an inflated number."
"You need a certain level of technical experience because the console is not the easiest thing to look at."
"The room for improvement would be on event notifications. I have mine tuned fairly well. I do feel that if you subscribe to all the event notification types out-of-the-box, or don't really go through and take the time to filter out events, the notifications can become overwhelming with information. Sometimes, when you're overwhelmed with information, you just say, "I'm not going to look at anything because I'm receiving so much." I recommend the vendor come up with a white paper on the best practices for event notifications."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"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."
"Regarding improvements for Uptycs, I suggest simplified onboarding for complex cloud environments because the current onboarding method is complex and requires checks with the support team."
"We end up facing a lot of issues after upgrades."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"Very costly product."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"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."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"Cisco Secure Endpoint is not too expensive and it's not cheap. It's quite fair."
"It can always be cheaper."
"...the licensing needs to be improved. All the product features we need are there. It's just a matter of the complexity and the different offerings and trying to figure things out."
"Its price is fair for us."
"Pricing is a big issue."
"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."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
899,258 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%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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
No data available
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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
Comcast, Crossbeam, Flexport, Greenlight Financial, Lookout Security, PayNearMe
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Microsoft, SentinelOne and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: May 2026.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.