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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs HP Wolf Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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 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)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
25th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (17th)
HP Wolf Security
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
3.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (44th)
 

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 Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 1.1%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HP Wolf Security is 3.1%, down from 6.3% 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%
HP Wolf Security3.1%
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform1.1%
Other92.0%
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.
Tom Foal - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Klaatu IT Security Ltd
Stops ransomware before it executes and reduces response time for the team
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data storage, backups, and other related areas. It is difficult to think of what they could improve, but low information provided by the system when it detects something is one area, particularly in scripting. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform detects malicious scripts but it needs better measures, perhaps signing scripts, so we can be sure that a script is created by a client, not by some malware. It is really about helping us triage incidents effectively, so a bit more help with the analysis of incidents, particularly what the Deep Instinct Prevention Platform agent has discovered, would be beneficial. We need to know what it has spotted that makes it suspect malware.
BH
Owner at Stoneridge Engineering, LLC
Adds a layer of safety, especially for laptops operating in various environments
The tool's deployment is easy. HP Wolf Security's deployment was a swift process since it was initially compatible with Windows 10, the operating system on both machines. However, when I transitioned to Windows 11, I encountered minor issues that prompted me to delve deeper into Wolf Security to fine-tune security settings according to my preferences. While I mostly used default settings, there was an initial adjustment where I disabled the AI function related to malware. Currently, the system is running smoothly with no reported issues. Adjusting some settings raised concerns about compatibility between HP Wolf Security and Norton 360. Specifically, aspects of HP Wolf Security, such as the virtual machine component, intrigued me, but I hesitated due to potential conflicts. During my investigation, Windows 11 raised a flag, questioning the system's security settings with Norton 360 and HP Wolf Security. However, it seems that they coexist well without causing issues.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It detected stuff that other things wouldn't detect."
"It can automatically correlate events and logs, which is very helpful for an IT administrator. It can correlate different kinds of malware activities over a network, agent, or host system. You do not need to do it manually. It is a good feature. It is also a user-friendly solution. We have deployed it on the cloud because our space does not provide any flexibility for on-premises deployment, but Palo Alto has added some flexibility to install it on-premises. It must be like the same Cortex XDR agent for all the VPN services, web filtering services, and everything else."
"Stability-wise, it is good; I did not hear about any issues in terms of stability, and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can be trusted completely."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"Palo Alto is the core of the security infrastructure in the environment."
"There are a lot of lead solutions in this space, however, Palo Alto is number one."
"The stability is pretty good except for one or two cases, and based on the performance, it's been okay with pretty high performance, no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze."
"Cortex XDR is a simple platform that's easy for administrators and users. You have a lot of flexibility to change or customize the features."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"No valuable quote available from the provided review sections."
"Deep Instinct was a strategic complement to our Open XDR platform."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"Deep Instinct has helped us to be a lot more proactive on the security front, rather than reactive, saving us a lot of time in incident response and significantly reducing our SOC’s endpoint protection management time and false positives."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"We think of this product as a fishing net that fits into the computer and has all of the capabilities and understanding of what ransomware and malware look like."
"Our overall security posture has absolutely improved as a result of adding Bromium to our security stack. We continue to have less user impact through a significantly reduced amount of malware infections. It's become a non-event."
"The isolation feature is the most important because it prevents attacks."
"Bromium allows us to safely view images and quickly and safely surf our network so that we can take proper care of our patients efficiently, effectively, and expeditiously."
"It has reduced the number of virus and malware incidents and calls we have received compared to prior to deploying this product, and our overall security posture has improved."
"Looking at it in the big picture of the risk that you're mitigating and the protection that you're getting, it's phenomenal."
"The most valuable feature is the process isolation because it simply stops malware from infecting the machines."
"The feature that stands out the most is that when someone clicks on a link in an email... [if] that link is malicious and it has some malware or keylogger attached to it, when it opens up in that Bromium virtualized browser, there's no chance of it actually being on the machine and running, because as soon as they click that "X" in the upper right-hand side of the browser, everything just vanishes. That is an added plus."
"It has prevented thousands of potential threats by encapsulating them within its own vSentry container, thus providing overall protection and integrity of the operating system."
 

Cons

"I would like to see improvement in the tool's user interface, particularly in the area of managing alerts and providing more reporting capabilities."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"When it comes to malware files, it should be a little quick because, at times, it would give a wrong result in the sense of what it might be on malware, even if it still might be a normal one."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"The downsides of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks are that in many incidents, when I enter the causality chain, there are numerous logs."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"It would be nice if there were options where, if I have to do SIEM integration, I could do so from the UI: Just pick and choose what SIEM solutions the customers use and have options to have out-of-the-box connection facility."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"I am looking forward to them adding Linux in Q1 or Q2 of 2019, as this is often requested by my partners and customers. Currently, Deep Instinct only has Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS."
"Some of the features are very resource intensive, such as the ransomware detection. It consumed so much of the resource on the endpoints that we have disabled those functions."
"When things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background... we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was."
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability."
"Initial setup was complex. There were many configurations that needed to be worked out with the vendor. The setup required hands-on assistance from Bromium."
"They need to improve the compatibility with other applications and its stability. It works well with attacks, but it doesn't work well with all software on the clients. There is a lot of troubleshooting and a lot of things that need to be tuned to make it work and not break things."
"They have always struggled with usability. The protection that it offers you is tremendous, but there's definitely an impact with use of resources on the computer. It's gotten a lot better now with Win 10. But sometimes, when you open up a website, it's going to take longer than it would without Bromium, and it's the same with documents."
"Room for improvement would be keeping up with the rate of change, specifically on Windows platforms."
"Initially, when we came in contact with Bromium a few years ago, it had a nice threat analyst, or a LAVA Pop, which is what they used to call it. Once it detected malware, it would show us the malware's path... I don't see that on the computers now. We only get to see that in the console. I would like to still see that on the individual machines because when we go out to look at a machine, we don't necessarily have access to the console."
"After a major release, there's always a lot of "dust settling." You have to work through all those issues and then you're fine for a while. The problem is, it's stable, it's fine, until the next major release comes out. Then you go back into the cycle again of uncertainty, instability, working through issues until they have patched and remediated all the problems that you're having. It's not unlike any other vendor though"
"Reporting is one of the shortcomings of the product. We do mine the data that's in there from a forensics perspective... It becomes very difficult because you have to spend a lot of time digging through the volumes of data. Reporting is absolutely the biggest shortcoming."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"The product's pricing is a good value. We only run it on our internet-facing workstations, we don't run it on everything in our environment. We are very selective. Some organizations may want to consider doing something like that to reduce their license count."
"Pricing is reasonable."
"The pricing is very fair compared to the competition. The licensing is straightforward."
"The product came as a bundle with the machine."
"I think the pricing is a good value. All of these security products are always going to be very expensive, but I don't think Bromium is unreasonable. I think Bromium is decently priced. It’s a tiered licensing platform. The more you buy, the cheaper gets per unit, and I think their tiers are very well defined. I think they're fair."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
914,109 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%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise5
 

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 Deep Instinct?
The price for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is reasonable. It is about the same price as any other antivirus.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data s...
What is your primary use case for Deep Instinct?
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is basically a stopper that prevents any malware, including zero-days. The main ben...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Bromium vSentry
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Valspar
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. HP Wolf Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,109 professionals have used our research since 2012.