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

Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection vs VIPRE Endpoint Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Comodo Advanced Endpoint Pr...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
45th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VIPRE Endpoint Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
51st
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 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 Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VIPRE Endpoint Security is 0.7%, up from 0.3% 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%
Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection0.9%
VIPRE Endpoint Security0.7%
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.
IK
Director at IP Infotech Pvt. Ltd.
Ransomware protection has made data security reliable and efficient
There are not many disadvantages, but they need to do some work on DLP integration. Support could be improved. Sometimes it is difficult to find exact solutions, and people occasionally get stuck, resulting in delayed responses. The main areas for improvement are support responsiveness and the additional enhancement with the DLP integration.
SS
IT Security Analyst at a healthcare company with 11-50 employees
Easy to upgrade and manage but needs better reporting
There just was a lot about it that I didn't like. For blocking certain items, such as USBs, we felt like it was slowing down the network too much. Therefore we utilized a GPO for blocking things like that instead. Our environment was big and I didn't feel like the console did a good enough job. We outgrew the product. I've been asking for a change for a couple of years now, and it finally got approved. In terms of the console, I had over 2000 endpoints in there and there wasn't even a search feature for me to look through them. If I had to find where a policy was I had to sort in alphabetical order to find an endpoint that I wanted. They need to offer a search function within the console - maybe something that shows a "last connected" notice. That way, it's easier to manage obsolete machines that you don't need anymore. They had a very vague setting, like after so many days, when do you want us to remove these, you'd see them. I just wish the console was a little more responsive when I would do commands. The reports could have been better. The product would show a lot of endpoints as not communicating. That was another pain point. We constantly had to run an SQL query to clean up the database as I would know immediately when I was in the console, that it just wasn't being responsive. I could tell I was being given bad data and that we had to clean up the database. As soon as I would clean up that database, it was like a purging of the SQL database and it would become a lot more responsive. The problem was that our environment was too big. We're going through a growth spurt right now. In the end, the solution is small and much better suited for a small business. We would get a lot of false positives and instead of them fixing the false positive, they would just want us to put in an exception, which I didn't care for. The product is based on an older model of signature files. It doesn't use any artificial intelligence or anything. It was slow to refresh the policies and computer scans. The larger we got, the more it became an issue. If a company stayed small, I'm not sure if they would have noticed.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The scalability of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very good."
"The most valuable feature is that you can select remote access of any machine for sandboxing."
"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."
"On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks a nine."
"It blocks malicious files, prevents attacks, and doesn't require many updates because it is a very light application."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"These days it's machine-learning technology and behavior-based analytics features that make us more secure."
"Overall, it's a great platform; it integrates very well with other solutions from Palo Alto and also with our vendors, the ease of use is excellent, I love the root cause analysis from Cortex, which is amazing, and in a few clicks you can have the full root cause."
"Containment is the best feature of the solution."
"They offer the whole package. Remote monitoring and management (RMM) is included with it, which is pretty nice. They also have Windows patching and third-party patching. It was easy to use for protection. The containment engine was pretty nice for securing our environment."
"The most valuable feature is the management of end-user machines."
"If you open up an application or a web browser, it puts a container in a sandbox area. So if there's some malicious code, it'll stick there. It also has way better protection for ransomware because it uses heuristics that are pretty effective. We've done a lot of tests with live malware, and it works really well."
"The most valuable feature of Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is its ability to provide ransomware protection."
"It really protects and does its job. It totally blocked every attack attempt, and no attack attempt was successful."
"It gives you a really good balanced portfolio to work with for your machines, not just on the malware protection and the firewall protection, but the virtual container, the ability to manage endpoints, the ability to manage patches."
"The product’s valuable feature is the remote control station."
"In general, it was pretty easy to manage."
"Technical support was always very helpful and responsive."
"It has improved the way our organization functions, made things run faster in our company, and has done a fantastic job of keeping our networks free of virus."
"It has low overhead as far as machine resources are concerned. Everything runs faster with VIPRE installed versus some of the competitors. It has also been pretty easy to use. It just runs and gives us reports. It also sends us alerts when there is something that we need to look at. It does its job, and you just look at the reports. In other ways, you just forget that it is there."
 

Cons

"The solution should enhance the ADR and reporting."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"Additionally, I think the price is very high, and if it can be adjusted, I believe it will be a very good solution."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a strong tool, but it is true that digesting information sometimes makes the tool go a little bit slower."
"Product might have some bugs."
"We'd like the solution to include advanced web filtering capabilities, similar to what Sophos offers."
"They need to enhance the performance of the agents. Currently, the performance is going low when the agent starts a full scan. The agent is consuming a lot of resources while scanning. When there are a lot of documents to check, it slows down the endpoint. This is the only thing that worries me about Comodo, but this issue is also there in other products. It is missing DLP, and I know that they are working on adding some data loss prevention capabilities. They have added some capabilities, but these capabilities are not yet mature. I hope they will enhance these capabilities because it is important to prevent the data from going out from inside. We are protected from the outside, but we also have to be protected from the inside out."
"The solution's online documentation needs to be fine-tuned. It is not up to which solution currently has. There is some inconsistency in the knowledge present. I would like to see MDM in the solution's future releases."
"There could be MDRM features added to the product."
"Their support is not very good because they are very late to reply."
"Would be good to have a better understanding of what it is that you've got in quarantine."
"They need to just modernize the infrastructure with something that is next-generation. We have recently moved to SentinelOne. It had been doing good for us for a while, but we needed something modern with new technology."
"Some competing products outperform Comodo in this area."
"Their management interface is a little buggy as it will hang up and crash from time to time."
"We would get a lot of false positives and instead of them fixing the false positive, they would just want us to put in an exception, which I didn't care for."
"Their management interface is a little buggy. It requires a few system resources on the management interface. Its reporting can also be better. Overall, the reports are pretty good. They patch some third-party software, but if they can expand what they do for reporting and patch enterprise software, it would be handy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"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."
"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 price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Generally, the cost is between $16 and $19 per endpoint."
"I rate Comodo’s pricing a four out of ten."
"It was about 35 or 40 bucks per year for the endpoint."
"Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection is inexpensive."
"The tool's pricing is not very expensive and falls within the market price. The solution's licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The product is pricey."
"The price of this product should be lower."
"The product is very reasonably priced."
"Its price point has been phenomenal. Our previous solution from Trend Micro was triple the cost of it."
"Its price point has been phenomenal. Our previous solution from Trend Micro was triple the cost of it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
19%
University
8%
Wholesaler/Distributor
5%
Financial Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise1
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 Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection?
Pricing is competitive and considered average compared to other solutions.
What needs improvement with Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection?
There are not many disadvantages, but they need to do some work on DLP integration. Support could be improved. Someti...
What is your primary use case for Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection?
The use case for the Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection solution is very simple. Everyone is looking for a ransomwar...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Comodo AEP
VIPRE Cloud, VIPRE Endpoint Security Cloud Edition, VIPRE Endpoint Security Server Edition
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Christian Motorcyclists Association, City of Thousand Oaks, City of Danville, HRI Properties
College Station ISD, Mid-West Companies, Guardian Network Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about Comodo Advanced Endpoint Protection vs. VIPRE Endpoint Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.