We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Symantec Endpoint Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Cortex XDR presents an intuitive interface, advanced identification of risks, expandability, and compatibility with various other solutions. Users praised Symantec Endpoint Security for its regular virus signature updates and comprehensive administrator's console. Cortex XDR could use enhancements in hard disk encryption, security integration, and customer education. Reviewers said Symantec Endpoint Security could improve its graphical interface, Linux support, and scanning capabilities.
Service and Support: Some customers were impressed with Palo Alto’s support, while others reported mixed experiences. Some users said Symantec customer service was helpful but slow, while others have expressed general dissatisfaction with support.
Ease of Deployment: Some users thought Cortex XDR’s deployment was fast and straightforward, while others consider it to be a complex and time-consuming task that requires thorough planning. Some users said Symantec Endpoint Security was easy to set up, while others struggled with the installation. Deployment time varies depending on the customer’s environment.
Pricing: Some reviewers said Cortex XDR is expensive, but others said it was reasonable for the robust feature set Cortex offers. The cost of Symantec Endpoint Security depends on the licensing terms and necessary security components. While some users find the price acceptable, others believe it could be more affordable.
ROI: Cortex XDR creates value by ensuring system and data security rather than a financial return on investment. Symantec Endpoint Security demonstrates strong stability and incident prevention, leading to reduced downtime. It offers a favorable return on investment.
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"The stability is very good."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"Best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"There are no issues with scalability."
"Some important features that are included are the built-in firewall and device control."
"The performance of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is very good. It does not slow down the computer like other solutions."
"Their threat protection is very good. We are managing a good number of users thanks to the solution and we are pretty satisfied with it."
"SEP, the entire suite of components, provides good endpoint protection."
"The solution is very stable."
"I find it is the most reliable solution on the market."
"The administrator's console is very good and easy to manage with it. Deploying patches, definition updates and report is simple."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"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."
"The solution could improve by providing better integration with their own products and others."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"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."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"The solution already has support for Windows, Mac, and Linux but it could improve by having better support for Linux. We have run into some problems when there are upgrades. If they can improve this point, Symantec would be good for endpoint protection as well as for a critical server."
"Users mostly complain that the solution slows down the system whenever something is scanned."
"Overall, the price could be reduced."
"We must have complete dissolution with advance care protection but we are finding out that we need more Symantec technical specialists. We have identified a need to hire at least one more technical specialist familiar with Symantec to improve our solutions capabilities."
"Sometimes tech support is a bit slow to find a solution."
"I would like to see improvements in the anti-virus and the device control features."
"The platform itself can be improved as there's no way to track how infections get into the organization."
"There are limitations because everyone these days has hybrid working; however, the endpoint does not work for us unless we are connected to a VPN, which is a major limitation."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 139 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Trend Micro Apex One and SentinelOne Singularity Complete, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Symantec Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.