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

ESET Inspect vs Kaspersky Next XDR 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
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
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 XDR Expert
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
35th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (38th)
 

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 XDR Expert is 1.1%, down from 1.2% 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 XDR Expert1.1%
ESET Inspect0.9%
Other94.3%
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.
Manikumar David - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at R K Khanna and Associates
Experienced weak security checks and increased system load with limited control
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to what I have seen from earlier products. I was using CrowdStrike, and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to CrowdStrike and other products. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response sometimes seems to allow certain files which should not be allowed on its own. I trust Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response to check the files, but I cannot sit and check all the files that are coming in. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response has its own weaknesses. Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response slows the system slightly. It uses more resources than what CrowdStrike does. When any attack happens or something is happening with other products I am using, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response stops certain things. However, it does not take me to the file, and it is not user-friendly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"There are a lot of lead solutions in this space, however, Palo Alto is number one."
"From a single pane of glass, you can easily manage all of your endpoints."
"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."
"There has been a significant reduction of approximately 70% to 80% in our internal MTTR and MTTD metrics, now around five to eight minutes whereas previously it was hours, which has helped tremendously."
"I can highlight that we have not faced any security incidents with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and even though our environment is quite dynamic, we have not faced any security incident with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks until now."
"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."
"The most valuable aspect of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks for me is its integration with AI detection, where we get to know the behavioral detection based on users, traffic patterns, and different services that we consume."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"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."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"It downloads essential security patches that are valuable for my PC."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"From my point of view, one of the best aspects of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is its high detection rate, which surpasses many other solutions. Its valuable features include behavior detection, threat prevention, device control, adaptive anomaly control, and centralized protection detection."
"One of the most valuable aspects of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions is their ability to detect and respond to spam and viruses in their early stages."
"It is a stable solution...It is a very scalable solution."
"One of the good features is the provider's Faulting capability. If any of our systems detect malware, we can check the behavior of the malware by sending it to Kaspersky's sandbox environment. This helps us assess how destructive the malware is. After analyzing it, we can create use cases and protection measures based on that behavior. So, this is the best feature of Kaspersky."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is its consolidated features."
"It is a secure solution with a lot of IT management features."
 

Cons

"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"For Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, if I had to point out improvements, I would say the UI is still somewhat difficult for beginners."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve its user interface, which is more complicated compared to competitors such as SentinelOne."
"One thing that was missing was the integration part. Currently, they don't have out-of-box integration with IBM QRadar, or if they have the integration, the integration doesn't work well."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."
"In some cases, there are too many options for me, and it is a bit too hard to find some settings which I really need to implement."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The platform's price could be better."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"Enhancing user-friendliness should be a priority."
"First, it would be beneficial if they could optimize the solution to be less resource-intensive, as it currently tends to put a heavy load on our machines and requires specialized servers for deployment."
"I want to be able to use the product as a patch management tool for my endpoints since it is an area that is not working effectively for me."
"One of the main areas where the tool could improve is its integration capabilities. For example, I find it challenging to integrate it with other solutions. It would be helpful if the tool could make it more open to integration with other tools."
"There are certain shortcomings with the UI of the solution. The UI is not at all user-friendly."
"Kaspersky is not an XDR solution. With an XDR solution, we could gain some more time."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response needs vast resources on the central node. Not all maintenance tasks are in the GUI, so we often use commands. The lack of documentation for these processes means we frequently reach out to support, open tickets, and run complex CLI commands. It's not the most straightforward process. It should also improve stability."
"My team was struggling with the reporting when we were doing an audit. The console features are a little more interactive and user-friendly. There's some issue, or maybe some fixing has to be done."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"I am using the Community edition."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"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 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."
"Yearly payments are to be made toward the licensing costs of the solution."
"It is cost-effective in terms of services and features compared to other more expensive EDR solutions like CrowdStrike and Trend Micro."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"I would say that their pricing is generally competitive and attractive."
"I was satisfied with the pricing of Kaspersky."
"The solution is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing model a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"The pricing falls within the average range."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 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%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

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 Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise6
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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is not up to the mark compared to what I have seen from earlier products. I...
What advice do you have for others considering Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response?
It seems okay. CrowdStrike was not heavy on my network or usage. I would rate this product an 8.
 

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 XDR Expert and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.