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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs Malwarebytes Teams comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 15, 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)
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)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Malwarebytes Teams is 1.6%, down from 2.2% 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%
Malwarebytes Teams1.6%
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform1.1%
Other93.5%
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.
reviewer2594097 - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Executive Officer at a wholesaler/distributor with 11-50 employees
Exceptional malware protection with regular updates and behavior-based detection
There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity. The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it. Other customers have mentioned issues with false positives. It lacks enterprise-level management and more enterprise functionality. CrowdStrike and SentinelOne are much more enterprise-grade solutions. Malwarebytes has limited integration with cybersecurity tools and lacks enterprise integrations because it is not an enterprise product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"The most valuable features of this product are the management capabilities, which allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks, and its out-of-the-box investigation capabilities."
"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."
"It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core."
"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."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The biggest positive impact I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a significant reduction in the number of people required to manage it."
"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."
"The support is very good. They reply and respond very quickly."
"This solution is good at catching viruses and it's very effective and lightweight, which are all things that you want in an antivirus product."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"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."
"Deep Instinct complements the solutions we already have. You don't need to rip and replace any antivirus or endpoint that you have. It's easy to use and it's easy to have it side-by-side with other solutions. That makes it really easy to have an additional level of protection, rather than to hassle with doing solution migration."
"We have a small IT team, and being able to manage even a small fleet of devices that are out in the field and being able to respond and remediate really quickly from the cloud-based console has been really helpful for us."
"The product provides notifications for suspicious events. We have several public access points. The product helps to prevent unauthorized entry. Its most valuable features are pre-installation procedures and a cloud console. The console's interface is simple and can be viewed easily to take action. It covers everything in terms of security threats."
"Malwarebytes is a comprehensive solution for keeping endpoints safe and secure from intruders, viruses, malware and so on."
"The pricing of the product is very good."
"I like the solution's ability to detect potentially unwanted programs. For some reason, it seems superior to other solutions, or at least in comparison to McAfee."
"The technical support services are good."
"I would recommend Malwarebytes because it's quite secure and able to prevent ransomware."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to customize for different groups."
 

Cons

"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"There's an overall lack of features."
"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."
"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."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."
"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 Management Console is not localized."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"The documentation could be improved. They have a manual, but it is not excessive."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"The main area for improvement in Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is Arm support, which is not implemented yet."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in the solution."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"We have noticed that when the solution is doing the scanning, all the scanning activities make the device heavier. It slows down your machine."
"There's no indication on the system as to when the software is doing a scan."
"If they want to compete with bigger players, they should consider adding items like threat detection and website warnings."
"Malwarebytes can improve its network database. Malwarebytes can scan the files and registry. It can scan the system with a light agent. It will not impact the performance of your PC. You can do the full scan and database scan using the EDR, and the RAM and CPU consumption will not increase."
"The product is a little bit more expensive than the other brands."
"The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it."
"Requires increased efficiency in terms of detecting false positives."
"This solution reports far too many false positives!"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"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."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"If I include the false positive rate and the detection rate in the comparison, Deep Instinct is worth its price."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"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."
"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."
"The cost may be something in the ballpark of $20-25 a year per computer."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the product's pricing a seven."
"It is expensive."
"Its licensing is annual. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"The licensing is per seat, with clients being a little less expensive than servers. If we need more licenses, we can accomplish that within a day. As Malwarebytes adds new features to their product, such as DNS filtering and a patching module, they want to charge us more even though we're a premium user, which isn't ideal."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 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
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

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 Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
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 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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Malwarebytes?
I really hate the automatic rebilling without officially confirming it with me. It's an annoyance and they should at ...
What needs improvement with Malwarebytes?
It takes up too much space when it's trying to run in the background.
What is your primary use case for Malwarebytes?
My primary use case is that it's protecting me against malware.
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Knutson Construction
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Malwarebytes Teams and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.