We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Fidelis Elevate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Extended Detection and Response (XDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can use Defender to block and monitor for security purposes without needing multiple other products to do different tasks."
"The 'Incidents and Alerts' tab is a valuable feature where we can find triggered alerts."
"Defender XDR has a feature called the timeline that lets you track all activities. It helps a lot with investigations."
"From the perspective of Microsoft 365 XDR, the main benefit is a single, centralized dashboard offering the holistic visibility organizations crave."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"Microsoft 365 Defender is a good solution and easy to use."
"Advanced hunting is good. I like that. We can drill down to lots of details."
"The dashboard is customizable."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks should be a stable solution."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management."
"They did what they said. This solution could apply to any scenario."
"If there are multiple alerts, the app will automatically create and rate an event instead of going through each one."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"It is easy to use."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"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."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"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."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"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."
"The console is missing some features that would be helpful for a managed services provider, like device and user management."
"My client would like the solution to be more customizable without using code. You can only build on the default console, but we're not allowed to change it."
"The onboarding and offboarding need improvement. I work with other vendors as well, and they have an option to add a device or remove a device from the portal, whereas with Microsoft 365 Defender, we need to do that manually. However, once you do that, everything can be controlled through the portal, but getting the device onboarded and offboarded is currently manual. If we have an option to simply remove a device from the portal or get a device added from the portal, it would be more convenient. The rest of the features are similar. This is the only area where I found it different from others. I would also like to be able to simply filter with a few of the queries that are already there."
"365 Defender has multiple subsets, including Defender for Cloud Apps. When integrating Defender for Cloud Apps with apps on third-party cloud platforms like AWS or GCP, there are limitations on our ability to control user activities. If Microsoft added more control over third-party products, that would be a game-changer and help us quite a lot."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"The message trace feature for investigating mail flow issues should add more detailed information to the summary report... if they could extend the summary report a little bit, make it more descriptive, ordinary administrators could understand what happened and that the emails failed at this or that point. That way they would know the location to go to try to correct it and to prevent it from occurring again."
"The user interface of Microsoft 365 Defender could improve. They could make it simpler."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is not a full-fledged EDR or XDR."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"It should support more mobile operating systems. That is one of the cons of their infrastructure right now."
"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."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"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."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 3rd in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 80 reviews while Fidelis Elevate is ranked 21st in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 7 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "It provides a whole new level of visibility and integrates with most other vendors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trend Micro Apex One, whereas Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS). See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Fidelis Elevate report.
See our list of best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Extended Detection and Response (XDR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
