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

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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Coro
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
63rd
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (47th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (70th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (54th)
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 (8th), SSL/TLS Decryption (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (23rd), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (30th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (42nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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 Coro is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 1.0%, up from 0.4% 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 Networks3.7%
Fidelis Elevate1.0%
Coro0.7%
Other94.6%
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

"Implementing Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has had a significant impact on my security analyst workload because it becomes much easier."
"We switched because there were a lot of added features with Palo Alto that Check Point didn't have, and it was an upgrade for us."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription."
"When the pandemic started, Palo Alto came up with many solutions, which helped with the quick shift from on-premises to the cloud."
"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."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has helped lighten the load of our security analysts because it was the major tool that we were using and the one we utilized most."
"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"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 initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"The solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"The technical support is very helpful."
"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."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"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

"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"I feel that it should not be a licensed activity because a feature should allow us to see applications running on end devices."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"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."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all."
"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."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"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."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"The price was fine."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
Information not available
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"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."
"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.
910,005 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
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 SentinelOne, CrowdStrike, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: July 2026.
910,005 professionals have used our research since 2012.