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

ESET Inspect vs Zscaler Client Connector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
34th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zscaler Client Connector
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
24th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Client Connector is 0.7%, up from 0.2% 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 Networks3.6%
Zscaler Client Connector0.7%
ESET Inspect1.0%
Other94.7%
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.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at IOPoint.com
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…
DA
IT Support Admin at Kuehne & Nagel Inc.
Client activity has been monitored efficiently through in-depth log analysis and traffic filtering
I use the Zscaler speed test, and it is very nice. We use some logs from Zscaler Client Connector to collect data and see what is happening, such as if there is an interruption or something. There is a specific tunnel version that we have to use because, depending on the internet provider, some of them have lower speed, so we have some issues. This is because of the provider, not from Zscaler. We use Office 365 services and Office applications, and because some connections are slow and they do not have full coverage from the internet provider, we have some issues. If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down. This may be because they put some policy. Of course, if you use Office 365 services such as Outlook, the minimum bandwidth is 5 megabits and more, so this causes issues if the users do not have a good remote connection. This depends on the companies and the users, so they need to fix it. This is not from us or our company. It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful. When we go to logs, we understand what is happening.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"I recognize that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is one of the best products in its category regarding capabilities."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"It blocks malicious files, prevents attacks, and doesn't require many updates because it is a very light application."
"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 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."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"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."
"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."
"It is very important to see what is happening between the user and the applications that we have, and to filter the traffic from outbound traffic and inside traffic."
"I'd rate the solution nine out of ten."
"The best features of Zscaler Client Connector are that it gives the client a much more transparent experience, as they don't have to worry about connecting to a VPN."
"The real-time analytics feature in Zscaler Client Connector is another valuable feature called Digital Experience, or ZDX, which can easily identify the root cause of issues accessing public or internal resources and provide good analysis so relevant teams can quickly resolve them, making it a very good tool that helps customers."
"Zscaler Client Connector is quite scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine or ten out of ten."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
"Zscaler Client Connector has eliminated VPN bottlenecks and outages, improved user productivity with instant secure access, and reduced help desk tickets related to VPN issues, overcoming 60% of VPN-related problems while allowing faster onboarding of remote users and better enforcement of zero-trust security policies."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can improve mobile integration to allow access to the console."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"If you compare it to SentinelOne, which has more functionalities and detection capabilities on an open platform, the pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks."
"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 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."
"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 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."
"If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down."
"There is room for improvement regarding the price of Zscaler Client Connector, as it is one of the most expensive solutions available."
"Zscaler Client Connector is not low in cost; it is definitely on the higher side."
"The stability of Zscaler Client Connector needs improvement, as it often disconnects and reconnects."
"There is a hard learning curve for Zscaler Client Connector; their support isn't the greatest all the time."
"I rate this product nine out of ten because I have seen some minor instability issues after updates and some room for UI improvement for deeper analytics, with instances of major issues after updating the GCC that required rollbacks."
 

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."
"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"Very costly product."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was 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."
"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."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise53
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
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 ESET Inspect?
The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward. We purchase soft keys, install them, and manage the licen...
What needs improvement with ESET Inspect?
One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security.
What is your primary use case for ESET Inspect?
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zscaler Client Connector?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing is fair, though it is a bit costly. It oper...
What needs improvement with Zscaler Client Connector?
For Zscaler Client Connector, I would appreciate more granular control over the client update rollout and slightly fa...
What is your primary use case for Zscaler Client Connector?
My main use case of Zscaler Client Connector is to provide secure, seamless access to the internet and internal appli...
 

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. Zscaler Client Connector and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.