Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR comparison

Palo Alto Networks and Qualys are both solutions in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category. Palo Alto Networks is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.6, while Qualys is ranked #71. Palo Alto Networks holds a 3.4% mindshare in EDR, compared to Qualys’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Palo Alto Networks users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Qualys users who would recommend it.

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...

Read 104 Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks reviews

14,331 Views
7,882 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Read 1 Qualys Multi-Vector EDR review

687 Views
481 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys Multi-Vector EDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR).

To learn more, read our detailed Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 peers since 2012

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 Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

8th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

104

Ranking in other categories

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (7th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

71st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Network Detection and Response (NDR) (28th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.4%
Qualys Multi-Vector EDR	0.3%
Other	96.3%

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

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.

Read full review

reviewer1668453

Director, Security Innovation at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

Provides contextual alerts and risk ratings on findings

It's kind of difficult to quantify areas for improvement. In the larger picture, one challenge is that the NDR space is very crowded today. I can mention half a dozen names just off the top of my head. There are at least 12 to 20 different players. All of them are well-known brand names, and it's difficult to compare them. They all claim to be giving you the same network difference capability: catching malware, dealing with all the minor taxonomy of attack, all that. Still, it's very difficult to compare them side by side because they all do things a little differently, and they all have different presentations and output. We haven't deployed it, so I can't give you what we felt about it exactly. But in the larger perspective, the critical feature is really giving a clear separation between a low, high, and medium criticality. You need a rating that is really true to the actual attack. There's one other capability we are evaluating them for, and it's for custom alerts detection. A lot of these products are trying to profile the threats that are already out there in the industry. They're very well known and published. Today, there are targeted acts being played against organizations, so you have to be sensitive to how your firewalls, protocols, and your HTTP are all operating. You might have some fine-tuned threats that are targeting you, and you should be able to build custom defenses. They should have some openness in terms of how you specify your threats. You get a standard library of threats. On top of it, every organization builds its own.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."

"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, and I have used it to verify hashes or domains to identify malicious activity, trigger playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."

"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."

"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."

"The normal protection was really effective, and we detected situations that if we didn't have Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it's highly likely that we would have been affected, but it protected the infrastructure."

"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."

"The initial setup isn't too bad."

"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"They can provide you very contextual alerts on if something bad is happening—coming into your network or going out of your network. As part of that, they gather a lot of threat intelligence and map your connections against that. The larger benefit is that they give you a risk rating on their findings."

Cons

"Enhancing UI simplicity and playbook flexibility are areas that could benefit from more low-code automation options for smoother integrations."

"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."

"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."

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."

"In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."

"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."

"The connection to the internet has not performed as expected."

"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"My challenge is actually comparing offerings from different vendors across a threat spectrum that is very large. We are talking about millions of threats. How are you confident that Blue Hexagon is catching all one million of them and Palo Alto is doing the same thing? They all have their strengths. Within that, Blue Hexagon might cover 990,000 of them. Palo Alto might cover another 990,000. It's a bit difficult to compare them and say, "Oh, are they catching the same 990,000?" I don't know."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."

"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."

"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."

"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."

"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."

"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."

"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."

"This is an expensive solution."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"It's difficult to state the setup cost. All the NDRs range anywhere between $500,000, plus or minus, to $2 million. There's a spread of pricing here, depending on who you are talking to. Obviously the major brand names want more money. They typically bundle it with their other offerings. With Cisco, for example, you don't just buy an NDR. So, typically it gets rolled into the cost."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

14%

Retailer

Comms Service Provider

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	43
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	46

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 9% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Complete vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 5% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 5% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 36% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 23% of the time

ExtraHop Reveal(x) vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 15% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 10% of the time

More Qualys Multi-Vector EDR Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

February 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

January 2026

Download Qualys Multi-Vector EDR product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

Blue Hexagon

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is designed for real-time threat detection and response, offering comprehensive visibility into potential security breaches across endpoints.

This solution integrates seamlessly with other Qualys modules, facilitating automated workflows that streamline incident management and enhance efficiency in monitoring and mitigating cyber threats. With features like real-time monitoring, detailed reporting, and proactive alerting, security teams can quickly identify and address vulnerabilities. While appreciated for its scalability and ease of deployment, users suggest improvements in integration, reporting, and configuration to further enhance its capabilities.

What are the key features of Qualys Multi-Vector EDR?

Real-time Threat Detection: Continuously monitors endpoints to detect potential threats immediately.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with other Qualys modules and existing systems for streamlined operations.
Automated Response: Automates incident response workflows to enhance efficiency and reduce manual tasks.
Detailed Reporting: Provides in-depth reports to support proactive security measures and quick remediation.
Scalability: Suitable for businesses of varying sizes due to its scalable architecture.

What are the benefits and ROI to look for when evaluating Qualys Multi-Vector EDR?

Enhanced Security: Comprehensive threat detection ensures robust security measures.
Improved Efficiency: Automated workflows save time and reduce manual intervention.
Quick Remediation: Real-time alerts and detailed reports facilitate swift vulnerability mitigation.
Cost-effective Deployment: Scalable and resource-efficient architecture suitable for businesses large and small.

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is implemented across industries such as finance, healthcare, and retail, where real-time threat detection and automated response are critical. Its ability to integrate with existing systems and provide detailed reporting makes it a valuable asset for enhancing cybersecurity measures in diverse environments.

Qualys

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Pacific Dental Services, Greenhill and Co, Heffernan Insurance Brokers

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.