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

CylanceOPTICS vs ESET Inspect 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
114
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
CylanceOPTICS
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
54th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
34th
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 July 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CylanceOPTICS is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, 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 Networks3.6%
ESET Inspect1.0%
CylanceOPTICS0.6%
Other94.8%
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.
GauthamVakapalli - PeerSpot reviewer
Account Manager at Teksalah
Provides reliable threat detection and response but requires better regional support
One improvement I suggest for CylanceOPTICS is more robust marketing efforts from their side. Many customers gravitate towards popular EDRs like CrowdStrike or Sophos, largely due to better marketing, despite BlackBerry Cylance being a superior product. The lack of marketing from distributors or vendors is a critical area where they are falling short. Apart from marketing, it would be beneficial for CylanceOPTICS to establish a dedicated team in GCC since I coordinate with the UK team to handle support. Whenever a ticket is raised by one of our customers, we have to wait for responses which can take a whole day due to the time zone differences, and a local team could expedite this process. In terms of scalability, CylanceOPTICS is indeed easy to scale, but one issue I face is related to visibility; while it is scalable, the security teams struggle with limited visibility as we need to gather data from multiple sources.
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

"Their XDR agent and their behavioral indicators of compromise (BIOC) are pretty nice. Their managed threat hunting is also pretty nice. They also have WildFire, which is a service for actively looking for malware. It's quite useful."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the user interface."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"Its ability to react to cyber data attacks is awesome."
"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."
"The stability of this product is very good."
"Palo Alto is the best security solution in the market."
"You can use the solution to query certain things."
"Cylance is not a signature-based protection solution and instead works proactively using AI and ML models to patrol for malicious behavior."
"The most valuable part of this solution is that it is advanced technology, as Cylance is an engine that is not a signature-based antivirus protection solution but is based on AI and ML models and could really not be more proactive in the way it works."
"The solution has a high level of trust in the industry."
"The technical support personnel I interacted with were good."
"I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. I would give it a close ten as possible because, like SentinelOne, I've seen incompatibility. Whereas Cylance, I've seen none."
"The initial setup was fairly straightforward. To get a large health care organization sorted, we had to create exemptions because some of the scripts and some of the automations were broken."
"It's pretty unintrusive"
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"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."
 

Cons

"There is also no recovery feature; if some endpoint is under attack there must be the possibility of recovering it or restoring it to a normal state."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve its user interface, which is more complicated compared to competitors such as SentinelOne."
"The onboarding process could be better."
"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."
"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."
"Currently, we are monitoring all USB drives and ports but we would like to improve our device control capabilities."
"Our customers would like to see more automation with respect to how threats are handled once they have been detected."
"It takes more time to investigate or dig up and understand what's going on."
"The reporting is very weak and not very good at all."
"The product's initial setup process could be easy."
"Whenever a ticket is raised by one of our customers, we have to wait for responses which can take a whole day due to the time zone differences, and a local team could expedite this process."
"The technical support could be improved although it's probably better than you get with a lot of the other traditional antivirus solutions"
"False positives could be improved. Cylance picks up a lot of them."
"The product's technical support is slow."
"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 is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"The platform's price could be better."
"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 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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"The price was fine."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"CylanceOPTICS is probably priced equal to other EDRs in the market."
"We pay for the number of endpoints we have and that is about it. On a monthly basis, the licensing cost is $55 per user."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of five."
"The pricing for CylanceOPTICS is very good; I would rate it around a nine on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the lowest. It's one of the most affordable options I've seen."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"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."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"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."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 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
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Healthcare 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 Enterprise21
Large Enterprise53
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
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 experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Optics?
In terms of cost, I find CylanceOPTICS to be reasonable; it's not overly expensive, nor is it at the lower end of the...
What needs improvement with Blackberry Optics?
One improvement I suggest for CylanceOPTICS is more robust marketing efforts from their side. Many customers gravitat...
What is your primary use case for Blackberry Optics?
One of the main use cases for CylanceOPTICS is endpoint detection and response, which even works without internet, un...
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
No data available
ESET Enterprise Inspector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Cerdant, Washoe County School District
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Find out what your peers are saying about CylanceOPTICS vs. ESET Inspect and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.