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

Coro vs Trellix Active Response 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
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)
62nd
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (46th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (71st), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (52nd)
Trellix Active Response
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coro is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trellix Active Response is 0.6%, up from 0.2% 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 Networks3.5%
Trellix Active Response0.6%
Coro0.7%
Other95.2%
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.
ED
Senior Manager Operational Technology and Cyber Security at Eskom Ltd
Operational efficiencies increase with immediate threat alerts for endpoints
We use Trellix Active Response primarily for our endpoints, including desktop computers. It monitors all the tools that our users use for their day-to-day work The alerts provided by Trellix Active Response are its most valuable feature. They notify us immediately of any vulnerabilities on the…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"But overall, when we speak about security and protection, they are one of the top providers."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"There are a lot of lead solutions in this space, however, Palo Alto is number one."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"The stability is pretty good except for one or two cases, and based on the performance, it's been okay with pretty high performance, no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"It is a simple platform to use."
"If you are looking to deploy a security solution as a whole, this is a good option."
"The auto-scanning feature is quite beneficial."
"The solution is scalable."
"The continuous monitoring component of this solution allows Trellix to launch the MDR solution, which correlates all incidents and provides investigation reports within a short period of time, hence offering an advantage to the customers using Trellix Active Response and its integrated products."
"It's a little lighter compared to the older version, which was mostly signature-based."
"With the ADR parts of it or the Active Response parts of it, we're able to get a little more information compared to the older version, such as analytics, user behavior analytics, triaging, and meaningful reporting."
"The alerts provided by Trellix Active Response are its most valuable feature."
"We are hoping to automate detection and response and take advantage of user behavior analytics, given that we are working from home. About half of our workers are still remote, so Active Response gives us that visibility and lets us automate a number of those events."
 

Cons

"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"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."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"A potential area of improvement for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the cost."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve its user interface, which is more complicated compared to competitors such as SentinelOne."
"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 only area for improvement is regarding operational technology devices, specifically the engineering automation systems."
"There are some components on the cloud that should also reside in the on-prem deployment models but don't."
"While the product is good, we are currently facing support issues."
"The truth, however, is that I was really looking for something much more advanced with user behavior analytics and some AI features that the other competitor's next-gen AV does offer."
"I also expected Active Response 's user interface to be much more analytical."
"I would rate technical support from Trellix Active Response as a seven because sometimes we face difficulties finding engineers quickly, leading to customer frustration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
Information not available
"Our costs were somewhere around $600K in Trinidad dollars, which might be about $100K US. We have the ETP plus the EDR. Our recent renewal was 1800 licenses as opposed to the full amount. Our transaction cost was about $600K Trinidad dollars, which is somewhere around $90-100K US."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
No data available
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 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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for McAfee Active Response?
Based on our evaluations, Trellix Active Response's pricing was the most feasible from a cost perspective. I rate the...
What needs improvement with McAfee Active Response?
For Trellix Active Response, there is room for improvement in the platform area and security area to make the dashboa...
What is your primary use case for McAfee Active Response?
The typical use case for Trellix Active Response is to provide quick incident response, as the product collects and c...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
McAfee Active Response
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lenovo, Dropbox, T-Systems
Liquor Control Board of Ontario
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.