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

ESET Inspect vs Kaspersky Next EDR Expert 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 Expert
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Expert is 1.3%, down from 1.5% 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 Expert1.3%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.1%
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.
Ravi-Upadhyay - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Inspira Enterprise
Provides strong threat detection and response through behavior analytics and network isolation
I have found the most valuable features of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert to be its ability to tackle the biggest challenges customers face when they have to mitigate any kind of a malware, ransomware attack, or online theft scenarios. The solution utilizes its HIPS, which is the host intrusion prevention system, behavior analytics system, and device control mechanism, making the antivirus capabilities of EDR quite strong. It is able to detect zero-day threats as well as historical or legacy malware, providing protection against current threats in the market and legacy malware. My opinion on the advanced threat detection algorithms in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is that the ATP functionality is quite strong because it utilizes the behavioral analytics engine in the backend, which employs machine learning mechanisms to identify any kind of vulnerability or exploit running on the operating system level and the network level. If an attack is about to happen on the endpoint, it is able to protect over the network as well and checks for any illegitimate encryption activities. The machine learning capability within Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert has contributed to improving detection accuracy and reducing false positives in my environment by helping me identify malicious activity and differentiate between any malicious activity on the operating system level and on the network level. I have seen customers with in-house developed applications that have no public signatures available. Once I whitelist a particular application, it intelligently whitelists not only the executable but also all the dependent services required to run that application. Furthermore, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert has successfully blocked network-level attacks on the endpoint. For example, during a recent DoS attack aimed at choking the entire network, Kaspersky detected the attack, isolated the device in a sandbox network, and alerted my SOC team via email for corrective action, thereby proactively helping me detect and protect devices from malicious attacks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The anti-exploit is impenetrable."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"Implementing Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has had a significant impact on my security analyst workload because it becomes much easier."
"I've found the solution to be highly scalable for enterprises."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has given us better endpoint visibility and richer investigation context, allowing us to identify suspicious activity, understand the attack path, and contain potential threats much faster than before."
"Cortex XDR is a very capable solution for protecting large networks and a lot of endpoints. It's very useful because the automation is very high, and if you combine it with the features on Palo Alto firewalls, it provides very strong protection."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has changed the way my security team detects, investigates, and responds to threats, as we are able to see the files, unwanted files, unsecured files, and unauthorized files, so we are quarantining them."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"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."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Kaspersky is one of the best, and we are working with it today."
"The features I have found most valuable in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert are that it is the first line of defense for my organization, protects every single file from outbound traffic, checks every mail and file through various methods like FTP and cloud, avoids attacks, and provides dashboards to my SOC team for early alerts."
"This solution is quite responsive and the tech support engineers are kind and good."
"I switched to Kaspersky because it seemed to work more quickly detecting suspicious files without affecting our work."
"The content filtering options are good."
"It's just running in the background, it doesn't bother us, and we don't even notice it is there, while helping improve security in our organization with good protection on offer."
"We particularly appreciate how scalable this solution is, as we often need to increase our end-user numbers."
 

Cons

"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"This product has not improved my organization - in fact, we are in the process of moving back to another product as a result of Cortex's horrible impact on system performance."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a very good product, but financially, it is very expensive, so the company should look into that area."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"Enhancing UI simplicity and playbook flexibility are areas that could benefit from more low-code automation options for smoother integrations."
"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."
"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."
"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 platform's price could be better."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"Compared to my previous product, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is not up to the mark; it's below my rating."
"Technical support can be improved. When you need support, when you call for support, and you present the evidence in a ticket, they always come back with more questions."
"They should include XDR features in the solution."
"We'd like to see them improve the automatic response."
"Kaspersky EDR currently has limited OS support. They only focus on Windows Server and Windows. Kaspersky recently released a Linux version, but it's rudimentary. It does not have any advanced features available on Windows platforms. They should increase their footprint on the Linux side and support other operating systems on the market, like MacOS."
"Installing Kaspersky is complex. It requires more work from system admins and takes almost one week to deploy, including integration and mapping with other solutions. You also have to configure Kaspersky EDR sandboxing then set up permissions for various teams and customers."
"If a customer wants to use Kaspersky on-prem, they'll need to spend a lot on the hardware."
"The solution is expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"The price was fine."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"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 has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"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 price of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is in the middle range compared to competitors. The pricing model is based on the users using the solutions. The cost for us is approximately 2200 Algerian dinars. The price of the solution could be reduced."
"The solution is worth its cost so I rate pricing a ten out of ten."
"Pricing for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is so-so when you compare it with its competitors. Its pricing isn't cheap nor expensive."
"EDR is priced on the cheaper side. Licensing for EDR is available on a yearly basis for around 80 SAR a year."
"The product has a valuable pricing model. We need to purchase its monthly subscription."
"Kaspersky's pricing is very competitive when it comes to comparison with the other solutions."
"Kaspersky is licensed on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is reasonable. Not too cheap, not too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
916,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 Business30
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise18
 

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 Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert?
The user interface of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert could be more intuitive, and I would appreciat...
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert?
My usual use cases for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert involve detecting ransomware earlier and proa...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
Kaspersky EDR
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Ferrari, Insolar, Tael, Republic of Serbia
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Kaspersky Next EDR Expert and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
916,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.