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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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...
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360
Ranking in Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) (23rd), Container Security (52nd), Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Extended Detection and Response (XDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 4.7%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks4.7%
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 3601.0%
Other94.3%
Extended Detection and Response (XDR)
 

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.
Maksym Toporkov - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research And Development at Quipu GmbH
A competitive choice for network detection and response with exceptional user interface, ease of implementation and minimal false positives
The NDR feature analyzes network traffic, creating records with connection details. While these records offer insights, there's a limitation in investigating payloads directly. ExtraHop provides an option for an additional server to save payloads, but its temporary storage has constraints. Unlike some competitors, it lacks an automatic payload-saving feature for each detection, presenting an improvement opportunity. Suggested enhancement involves the main sensor prompting payload storage for specific detections, streamlining the investigation process, and contributing to a more efficient workflow. A drawback includes packet storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Has great threat detection capabilities."
"The product is mostly automated, and we do not have to make decisions, because all the decisions are made by the product itself and we are not required to create any custom policies since the policies that are created are well defined in the product itself."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"After installing this solution, it identified, blocked, and provided the complete attack chain, which was very helpful."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, collecting relevant indicators such as hashes, IP addresses, or domains efficiently and can detect and block malicious attacks with firewalls."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for."
"It is very easy to collect and handle data in ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud. Integration with Big Data is also easy. Many of our customers integrate it with Big Data platforms like Splunk or Elastic. It is also easy to handle and easy to understand."
"It is scalable."
"Their technical support is more effective and of better quality than other competitors."
"It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for network security and management."
 

Cons

"Enhancing UI simplicity and playbook flexibility are areas that could benefit from more low-code automation options for smoother integrations."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"Basically, they don't provide customer support tools just to investigate the logs."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"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."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"It should support more mobile operating systems. That is one of the cons of their infrastructure right now."
"It would be good if they could make an exception for applications."
"Their professional service can be improved."
"There needs to be more support."
"A drawback includes bucket storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations."
"They can include integration with SAP. Currently, no vendor provides network performance monitoring in the SAP market. It is a very big market. We have around 400 customers for SAP in Korea. In the USA, there are more than 10,000 customers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"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."
"Cortex XDR is a costly solution."
"Very costly product."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"When compared to other solutions, it aligns with the market average, indicating a competitive pricing level."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise49
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. The ability to reverse damage caused by ransomware with minimal interruptions to...
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 that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
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, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud, Reveal(X) Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Wizards of the Coast
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.