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

Coro vs Fidelis Elevate 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 Detection and Response (EDR)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
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 (48th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (70th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (51st)
Fidelis Elevate
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
60th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Threat Deception Platforms (10th), SSL/TLS Decryption (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (23rd), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (32nd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coro is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.4%
Coro0.7%
Fidelis Elevate0.8%
Other95.1%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

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.
Vignesh  K - PeerSpot reviewer
Practice Engineer at Cloudunicorn.in
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
Information Security Engineer at ICT Misr
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

"It integrates well into the environment."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable. We chose Traps because it is the only product that we were not able to get anything past."
"The user interface of the solution is sophisticated and straightforward."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to rapidly detect certain hardware files."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"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 auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"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."
 

Cons

"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"Cortex XDR could improve its sales support team, including better commission structures and referral programs."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"For Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, if I had to point out improvements, I would say the UI is still somewhat difficult for beginners."
"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."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"The functionalities could be improved, such as the isolation feature."
"Scalability is lacking. If we want to do the same thing repeatedly, there's not much the solution offers; it isn't very strong."
"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."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"Very costly product."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"This is an expensive solution."
Information not available
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
884,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise2
 

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 Coro?
The cost is reasonable because it is aimed at SMB customers, not enterprise customers. The prices are reasonable. We ...
What needs improvement with Coro?
At that time, we observed certain issues with the product. The functionalities could be improved, such as the isolati...
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 wit...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
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

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
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: March 2026.
884,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.