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

CylanceENDPOINT vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 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 Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
CylanceENDPOINT
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
63rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (3rd), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (5th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (6th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CylanceENDPOINT is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.8%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
CylanceENDPOINT0.3%
Other94.6%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
Raphael Haroun  Ikyagh - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at Letshego
Stable, good for malware detection and prevention
I use it for general endpoint protection and the usual stuff like malware detection and prevention It secures my environment.  One thing that could be easier is initiating scans. If I want to scan an extra drive, it should be more straightforward. It's a bit clunky. I have been using it for…
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Since they've done their most recent update, the ease to isolate endpoints is valuable. If we find one where there is a virus on it, we can easily isolate it. We don't even have to contact the user. We don't have to manually take them off the network. We can easily isolate them."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has helped lighten the load of our security analysts because it was the major tool that we were using and the one we utilized most."
"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."
"If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies."
"We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for."
"Automation and playbooks have helped me significantly, as Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, efficiently detecting and blocking malicious attacks with firewalls while eliminating workload and speeding responses for next-generation operations."
"It secures my environment."
"It's easy to use in regards to reducing attack surfaces."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform has impacted our organization positively by providing protection and it has been a great tool for us from a security perspective."
"Overall, it works reliably and very efficiently without any false activities."
"The customer service is excellent, ten out of ten."
"Unified Audit is excellent for identifying our denies and using those to dynamically create rules, as opposed to manually observing the logs and creating them. It saves so much time."
"Our assessment of Elevation Control's role in facilitating Just-In-Time administrative access for approved applications is that we are loving it so far."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
"The time saved from dealing with ransomware nonsense is invaluable."
 

Cons

"As an improvement, I would like to see enhanced connection speeds."
"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"It takes time to scan the servers and devices."
"The product's pricing needs improvement. They could provide more discounts. Additionally, the dashboard and control panel could be enhanced."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"One thing that could be easier is initiating scans."
"It's very annoying to uninstall. You have to go into the online control panel and disable tampering for a device before it'll let you uninstall it without complaining really loudly."
"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."
"ThreatLocker could offer more flexible training, like online or offline classes after hours. The fact that they even provide weekly training makes it seem silly to suggest, but some people can't do it during the day, so they want to train after work. They could also start a podcast about issues they see frequently and what requires attention. A podcast would be helpful to keep us all apprised about what's going on and/or offline training for those people who can't train during the week."
"If you have a thousand computers with ThreatLocker agents on them, when you approve or create a new policy saying that Adobe Reader that matches this hashtag and meets certain criteria is allowed to be installed, it applies at the top level or the organization level. It applies to every computer in the company. When you make that new policy and push it out and it goes out and updates all of the clients. Unfortunately, at this time, it does not look like they stagger the push-out."
"I have several clients in the last few months that have definitely caused a problem where a domain controller completely destroyed replication once Network Control was put in place, and now our AVD servers in Azure also lose domain trust occasionally and it is intermittent, making it rather hard to prove to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that they really need to look at when there is a VPN in the middle of a domain controller."
"My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is that it replaced some tools, making it seem more competitive value-wise, but it is the flagship tool doing what it does, which means it is quite expensive."
"This is my first Zero Trust conference, and so far, it has been good. The only thing I have noticed is that sometimes they encounter technical issues. For example, in one of the demo labs, the laptop trying to connect to the projector was not working, which affected the demonstration of the victim versus attacker laptop scenarios. It would be helpful to fix these issues."
"Identifying which security and configuration settings need fixing using the DAC dashboard is somewhat difficult at times."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is moderate."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"I am using the Community edition."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"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."
Information not available
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"I believe ThreatLocker's pricing model is fair and flexible, allowing account managers to offer customized deals based on our specific needs."
"The pricing works fine for me. It's very reasonably priced."
"Although the pricing seems good, there have been inconsistencies in contract negotiations."
"The price is very reasonable, and we have been able to integrate ThreatLocker with all of our clients."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The pricing is fair and there is no hard sell."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
No data available
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business59
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise13
 

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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
I am not sure about operational or cost expenses because we have not really experienced that.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
When it comes to ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's policy making, it is very granular, but the moment you zoom out, ...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's main use case for us was data storage access control.We used ThreatLocker Zero Tru...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.