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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs ESET Inspect comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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)
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
29th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
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 Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.1%, down from 1.1% 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%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.2%
ESET Inspect1.1%
Other94.2%
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.
Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research Development and Innovation at CSIR
Offers useful threat hunting and response capabilities but struggles to justify cost for smaller deployments
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR components; I also get involved with some of the XDR components, especially for the cloud. Regarding analysis features, such as deep behavioral detection, I do use it sometimes; I usually don't use the automated version of it, as I prefer threat hunting directly, depending on if the season is available. I know some of them have pretty good analytics engines, but I tend to do the threat hunting on my own. I manage incident response for a bunch of companies, so some of them have Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response integrated into Sentinel, some into Fortinet, and others into various tools. When considering cost-effectiveness, their pricing structure works such that if you're a large organization with more than a thousand endpoints to deploy to, then Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is worthwhile. But for anything less than 300, it's too expensive; obviously, the more you buy, the better the price, making it cheaper for you. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response best fits enterprise-level businesses such as huge corporations; however, we are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment. We're trying to see how we can improve it with some of our clients, but at the moment, it's struggling compared to other EDR solutions that we have deployed. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response a six.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at IOPoint.com
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It collects and caches and the knowledge of machine learning from different customers to take to the cloud, it makes it better to use for everybody, it allows for quick learning and updates and can, therefore, offer zero-day malware security, and this sharing of metadata helps make the solution very safe."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"After installing this solution, it identified, blocked, and provided the complete attack chain, which was very helpful."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"We use it for malicious connections from malicious websites, to identify payloads that might be inside the traffic, to identify malicious processes or bugs that are running on the network, and any activities that tend to lead to data infiltration."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"We like that it is a hybrid; it’s flexible, you can really do whatever you need to do, the initial setup is not overly complicated, the solution can scale, and it is stable and reliable."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform. It is very straightforward."
"I highly recommend this solution for any organization that is solely depending on normal AV."
"If a file was infected on somebody's laptop or workstation, then it is now easier for us to understand what the impact is on the environment, as the Cybereason product enables me to go directly into the software, look up the process, see who were the dealers, what were the websites, what were the IP addresses which were contacted, and detect if there were other systems which were impacted or if my environment was compromised."
"Cybereason is helpful to organizations with a small security team, and with a single portal to manage and with it being a cloud portal, it really reduces the amount of overhead versus having a traditional on-prem solution."
"Immediately we can pick up the computers in the network if any malicious operation that is triggered."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"I have seen lagging with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. There was one time when we faced a threat actor trying to gain access to our system. When our team utilized the tool, we were all on the same dashboard and we faced a lag issue at that time of around five minutes, which was quite significant."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance."
"Cybereason is not flexible in terms of needing a lot of servers, or assets."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"I would like to see improvements on the operational side, specifically in grouping."
"While the product is very good, there are still some areas for improvement. The initial triage area could be a bit simpler. They get into the weeds real fast; it gets very detailed very fast. I am still looking for an easier triage layer on top with the ability to dig deeper."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"The platform's price could be better."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"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."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The pricing is manageable."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
902,270 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%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
 

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 primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ESET Inspect?
The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward. We purchase soft keys, install them, and manage the licen...
What needs improvement with ESET Inspect?
One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security.
What is your primary use case for ESET Inspect?
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
ESET Enterprise Inspector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. ESET Inspect and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,270 professionals have used our research since 2012.