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

ESET Inspect vs Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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 Detection and Response (EDR)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
51st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
31st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Ransomware Protection (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 0.9%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations is 1.0%, up from 0.6% 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 Networks3.7%
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations1.0%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.4%
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.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
HM
Cyber Security Manager at Greater Cairo Water Company (GCWC)
Centralized endpoint control has strengthened defense in depth across our distributed branches
When considering features or capabilities of Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations that I have found most valuable, it appears similar to other vendors, and I don't find a unique feature in it as it looks comparable to any other EDR solution. However, we purchased it because we have had Kaspersky Endpoint for 10 years, so it has fantastic integration between EDR and the endpoint. Additionally, Kaspersky is one of the famous leaders in endpoint protection in the world. The centralized management console of Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations has helped me streamline my security protocols significantly. This helps me a great deal because we are a large enterprise and we need centralization. It simplifies operations for us. We have many branches around Cairo, which is the capital of Egypt, and because we need centralization, we cannot perform our tasks without it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is easy."
"Since using Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, our MTTR has reduced, which means the mean time to resolve any ticket has been reduced."
"In one single alert, we are getting the network telemetry, endpoint telemetry, email security telemetry, and proxy telemetry all in one single ticket, making it very easy."
"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"My advice for anybody who is considering Cortex XDR is that it is a complete solution, and has very good features."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"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."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The platform's ability to update the database from my device and manage user profiles is quite effective."
"Kaspersky has a Cloud Discovery feature. There is no template in Kaspersky. They provide a temporary risk assessment of the cloud services. For example, if we want to block public storage services like OneDrive or Google Drive, we need to specify each individually. The main difference is that Kaspersky's process takes more time because it requires individual input."
"I would say that Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is one of the best, very effective software because of its vulnerability assessment and threat assessments."
"The AI-driven threat intelligence has helped my threat management significantly, as it helps me catch many threats."
"We had the cloud suite of KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud, and its monitoring was fine."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a very good solution for endpoint protection."
"In terms of software performance, it has been effective in providing good security."
"All features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud are perfect, and I am interested in working with Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"I think sometimes Cortex XDR agent automatically stops event capturing from the device, and then even the dashboard does not get any notifications from the agent."
"Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere."
"Fine-tuning the detection policy requires experience because the policy is very complex in Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and we get high false positive alerts."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"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."
"This is a very costly product."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"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."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"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."
"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."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The tool's update management can be better. In future releases, the addition of a DLP module would be valuable."
"Recently, there was a company which was attacked by phishing emails, and out of 10, it was only blocking three emails."
"One area where the product could be improved is in its delivery and installation process."
"Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations could be improved if it depended more on artificial intelligence, as other vendors such as CrowdStrike do."
"The solution’s stability could be improved because we earlier faced an issue where the solution was not detecting file-less malware."
"Certain shortcomings in the anti-ransomware part of the solution need improvement. XDR and MDR, along with threat hunting, a big step in cybersecurity today, need improvement."
"Kaspersky's global ranking has been on the decline."
"It requires specific expertise or certified professionals to deploy the product. There is a need to expand the offerings to various industries covering different-sized businesses."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"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."
"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 solution is moderately priced and cannot be considered an expensive or cheap tool."
"The product is averagely priced."
"The pricing is favorable, and there are no additional expenses associated with using the product."
"I find Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud more accessible in terms of pricing."
"We had to pay an annual licensing fee for KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud."
"The product’s price is flexible."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a cost-effective solution."
"The platform is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business48
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise56
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
 

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 needs improvement with KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud?
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations could be improved if it depended more on artificial intelligence, as other vendors suc...
What is your primary use case for KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud?
I use Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations for endpoint detection and response.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.