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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Rapid7 InsightIDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 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...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), 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) (36th)
Rapid7 InsightIDR
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
39th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (23rd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (10th), Threat Deception Platforms (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, 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 Rapid7 InsightIDR is 1.2%, up from 1.0% 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 Networks3.4%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.2%
Rapid7 InsightIDR1.2%
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.
SohailHyder - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at Super Secure
Has supported compliance needs for mid-sized organizations but lacks customization and advanced integration
If we pitch Rapid7 InsightIDR against solutions such as SIEMs from Splunk or LogRhythm, it is not as customizable as a SIEM solution is. This is where it can improve if we keep in front the feature sets of a complete SIEM solution. Most common in the market is QRadar, but it is depleting now. It has been taken over by some other products such as Splunk and LogRhythm. If we compare these things with Rapid7 InsightIDR, then there are definitely some gaps that need to be filled. Data retention is also one concern because Rapid7 InsightIDR is cloud-based and operates on a subscription model. Whatever data you want to retain, it has to be paid for separately or it has a cost. Other solutions that are on-premises can have their own infrastructure or they provide some data retention for a month or in some capacity-wise, they provide that solution to them which makes them more attractive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week."
"The positive impacts I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks include a complete 360-degree view of our security posture altogether, being a uniform platform where we are ingesting logs from multiple resources."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"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."
"Cybereason reduced our detection by 85%."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Cybereason has given me more coverage across more operating systems than what I have had in the past; I have more visibility now into a lot more areas."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"I highly recommend this solution for any organization that is solely depending on normal AV."
"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."
"Rapid7 is easy to use and deploy. It is a simple solution and has easy data pulling."
"I have seen that Rapid7 InsightIDR provides security to the networks and endpoints in the company."
"Rapid7's reporting is more robust than Tenable's."
"It improves because several sensors are deployed within the on-premise environment. It can be very efficient if the customer implements and operates it effectively."
"The web interface is great — very useful and user-friendly."
"Very intuitive and easy to set up."
"The ability to ingest Office 365 log files, then process them into events and display them on a map."
"InsightIDR helps us investigate an environment to discover information about incidents."
 

Cons

"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements."
"They need to improve their technical support services."
"Linux was a bad experience and Micro OS was a disaster."
"The technical support will need to be improved."
"It initially took some time to deploy."
"One thing that springs to mind is easier API integration with ITSMs. We are evaluating a new ITSM and I would like to have InsightIDR create a ticket when an attack is identified, and the ticket would be closed in InsightIDR when the ITSM resolution is completed. This would take out the "single point of failure" we currently have, if the email recipient is somehow absent, in recording the risk appetite for the incident and the actions taken to mitigate or not."
"The dashboard is an area that could be simplified."
"The main problem lies in the processes within the client's operating systems."
"There is a future in AI with Rapid7, however, it is not fully operated. There are certain limitations with Rapid7 that I am working on."
"The interface for doing investigation needs to be enhanced with minor improvements that would make it more useful."
"Cloud risk assessment is one area where I think they need a lot of improvement."
"I'd like to be able to get the compliance report within the solution which is currently not possible."
"One of the things that could be better is digital forensics. It is there, but it can be better. They could provide more on the endpoint detection level."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"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."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is manageable."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"Licensing is straightforward. If, for some reason, you don’t meet the minimum licensing requirements, there is a third-party managed service that can help."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightIDR's price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Rapid7 InsightIDR charges us based on the endpoints we connect to."
"The pricing and licensing are competitive."
"Rapid7 InsightIDR is priced very well and is cost-effective."
"It is a reasonably priced solution."
"The team is very willing to work with companies. My suggestion is to call the Rapid7 sales department and see how they can help.​"
"It is on a yearly basis. For our own company, for about 250 users, it was 16,000 euros a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
893,311 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
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise6
 

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 SOC product do you recommend?
For tools I’d recommend: -SIEM- LogRhythm -SOAR- Palo Alto XSOAR Doing commercial w/o both (or at least an XDR) is a...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightIDR?
If we pitch Rapid7 InsightIDR against solutions such as SIEMs from Splunk or LogRhythm, it is not as customizable as ...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
InsightIDR
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Liberty Wines, Pioneer Telephone, Visier
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Rapid7 InsightIDR and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.