Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Coro vs Fidelis Elevate 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

Coro
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
57th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (52nd), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (63rd), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (56th)
Fidelis Elevate
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
34th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Threat Deception Platforms (7th), SSL/TLS Decryption (3rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (15th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (25th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Coro is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Fidelis Elevate0.5%
Coro0.7%
Other98.8%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

Vignesh  K - PeerSpot reviewer
Auto scanning and enhanced security but re-adding protections need improvement
At that time, we observed certain issues with the product. The functionalities could be improved, such as the isolation feature. If we remove our protection, we cannot easily add it back. If, in our organization, we need to remove a specific system for a particular time, we cannot add it back for security after doing so. This is one thing we have experienced. Scalability is also lacking. If we want to do the same thing repeatedly, there's not much the solution offers; it isn't very strong.
Mostafa Ameen - PeerSpot reviewer
Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations
The initial aspect concerns two engines. The first one mentioned is available for searching behaviors directly. The second engine involves the Google Ade tool, which operates on the machine. The challenge arises when attempting to rectify protection rules, causing confusion. It would be beneficial to enhance Rigixs Query. I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
 

Cons

"Scalability is lacking. If we want to do the same thing repeatedly, there's not much the solution offers; it isn't very strong."
"The functionalities could be improved, such as the isolation feature."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"You license by the number of days of logs you need to maintain visibility for. Forty-five days is a good solid number for a company with around a 10k user base."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coro?
The cost is reasonable because it is aimed at SMB customers, not enterprise customers. The prices are reasonable. We received a demo license, so we tried it more extensively.
What needs improvement with Coro?
At that time, we observed certain issues with the product. The functionalities could be improved, such as the isolation feature. If we remove our protection, we cannot easily add it back. If, in ou...
What is your primary use case for Coro?
We have not sold the product to any customers as of now. We are still in the testing phase, which means we, along with our partners, are the current users.
What do you like most about Fidelis Elevate?
It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fidelis Elevate?
It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high. We lose customers for price. It's not always worth it for them. Even for enterprise...
What needs improvement with Fidelis Elevate?
The initial aspect concerns two engines. The first one mentioned is available for searching behaviors directly. The second engine involves the Google Ade tool, which operates on the machine. The ch...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Fidelis Elevate Platform, Fidelis Enterprise, Fidelis Cloud, Fidelis Managed Detection and Response, Fidelis Deception, Fidelis Decryption, Fidelis Endpoint, Fidelis Network
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lenovo, Dropbox, T-Systems
First Midwest Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: January 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.