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

Coro vs Fortinet FortiClient comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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
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) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Coro
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
53rd
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (50th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (70th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (61st)
Fortinet FortiClient
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Compliance (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coro is 0.5%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiClient is 1.9%, up from 1.8% 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%
Fortinet FortiClient1.9%
Coro0.5%
Other93.8%
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.
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.
KL
Senior Technical Manager at Flexaccel
Remote access has become seamless and secure while deployment remains simple for our users
Performance could be improved today. People are now moving toward SASE, which stands for Secure Access, Secure Edge Solution. Fortinet also has that offering, which would be easier since it operates through the cloud, acting as a first line of defense. When the user connects to the internet, they connect to the cloud first for posture assessment and monitoring before connecting to the outside world. The impact is significant because nowadays people are adopting SASE. During COVID time, many users were trying to connect back to their office, causing the performance or CPU utilization of the firewall to increase tremendously, which slowed down performance. I have not worked with endpoint telemetry in Fortinet FortiClient that could have been helpful for threat mitigation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The biggest positive impact I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a significant reduction in the number of people required to manage it."
"There has been a significant reduction of approximately 70% to 80% in our internal MTTR and MTTD metrics, now around five to eight minutes whereas previously it was hours, which has helped tremendously."
"The product is very good, it has caught a lot of exploits that most products would not."
"Automation and playbooks have helped me significantly, as Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, efficiently detecting and blocking malicious attacks with firewalls while eliminating workload and speeding responses for next-generation operations."
"Once you become familiar with it, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a more powerful tool and I would say that I prefer it over MDE because it is a stronger tool for me."
"The best feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is that it collects logs from different sections such as the endpoint, the network, and the cloud, making it easy to investigate alerts, collect some of the investigation packages related to the infected machines, and provide live response."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy."
"Our customers are generally looking for a solution that works well and they get it with FortiClient."
"There is a lot of documentation available online."
"The initial setup is very good."
"Compared to other similar solutions, it is faster in connecting."
"The most useful features are the reports that come from the end user's machines and devices, and you have everything in one place to tell you what's happening on the network."
"The performance of FortiClient is impressive."
"This solution is very stable."
 

Cons

"It is a complex solution to implement."
"The only issues that we have are, one the cost, two the dashboard is not very intuitive, even though you can drill down within the dashboard, we usually have to gather information from other sources to determine locations and if its a false positive."
"This is a very costly product."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"The server sometimes stops continuously to check things so it would be helpful to receive access updates or technical reasons."
"Dashboards do not allow everyone to see what's happening."
"The MAC agent is not as robust feature-wise as the PC version."
"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."
"It would be interesting if the solution offered a way to try to investigate and create a use case to trace vectors."
"The software inventory part is not yet up-to-date. It doesn't have a great interface, which is a disadvantage. I wish we could leverage it, but we don't use it at all because it's not that reliable."
"Sometimes there are issues when we are trying to connect. The error doesn't give us the proper feedback."
"Sometimes users stay on the old version of FortiClient."
"The artificial intelligent aspect of it needs improvement."
"The support can be improved. They have room to improve by deploying more support resources."
"I feel that this product is more to bolster their marketing, rather than its use for actual synchronization."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
Information not available
"The solution is not expensive. We need more discounted rates in Pakistan. The price of the solution could be reduced to be more affordable for the solution."
"Fortinet FortiClient comes free with the purchase of the FortiGate solution. There is a license required for this solution. You later can upgrade from the free version which will allow more endpoints. The cost of the license subscription is based on how many endpoints you require."
"The licensing fee varies with what one is trying to accomplish. It can range from being free to costing several hundred thousand dollars per year."
"The price is okay and competitive."
"The solution's scalability is inexpensive."
"The solution is more cost efficient than Cisco, as FortiGate tends not to charge for the client license, which allows one to make free use of whatever is supported on the device."
"I don't know it by heart, but it is comparable to other solutions. It is based on the number of clients. It is probably 50 Euros per year per client. It greatly depends on the number of clients you're handling because the more clients you are ordering it for, the cheaper it will be."
"FortiClient is costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
913,654 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business59
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise25
 

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...
How does Fortinet FortiClient compare with Open VPN Access Server?
Fortinet FortiClient is a feature-rich solution that is easy to use and deploy without sacrificing safety and securit...
What's the difference between Fortinet's FortiEDR and FortiClient?
I suggest Fortinet’s FortiEDR over FortiClient for several reasons. For starters, FortiEDR guarantees solid protectio...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiClient?
The solution is not cloud-based; it comes from the firewall itself.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
FortiClient
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lenovo, Dropbox, T-Systems
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: September 2026.
913,654 professionals have used our research since 2012.