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

Fidelis Elevate vs Sangfor Endpoint Secure comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Fidelis Elevate
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
60th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Threat Deception Platforms (8th), SSL/TLS Decryption (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (23rd), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (30th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (42nd)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
32nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is 0.7%, up from 0.7% 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%
Sangfor Endpoint Secure0.7%
Fidelis Elevate1.0%
Other94.6%
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.
Mostafa Ameen - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at ICT Misr
Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations
The initial aspect concerns two engines. The first one mentioned is available for searching behaviors directly. The second engine involves the Google Ade tool, which operates on the machine. The challenge arises when attempting to rectify protection rules, causing confusion. It would be beneficial to enhance Rigixs Query. I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls.
OA
Coordinator Associate at National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases
Quick threat response and behavior analysis while enhancing network security
The main use case is usually related to security. It deals with attacks that come day-to-day such as zero-day attacks and APT attacks. Our main task is to secure the network infrastructure in the hospital where I work It facilitates the departments of IT and other departments to procure and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"We switched because there were a lot of added features with Palo Alto that Check Point didn't have, and it was an upgrade for us."
"The product is mostly automated, and we do not have to make decisions, because all the decisions are made by the product itself and we are not required to create any custom policies since the policies that are created are well defined in the product itself."
"I like that the product has behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"But overall, when we speak about security and protection, they are one of the top providers."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"Its ability to react to cyber data attacks is awesome. That is pretty much the use of it. What blows your mind is the ability to access your assets remotely and see what is actually going on with them. You can not only see them in a console. You can also react very rapidly to your assets that are compromised."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"It is used as our primary in-line IDS/IPS system, replacing FireEye NX, and it catches more, looks at more ports than FireEye NX, and is a scalable appliance, unlike our NX which was saturated and shut itself down."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"I like the tool's honeypot feature. Some features include having a honeypot to detect attacks in a certain area. Additionally, there is RDP protection, which means that when we remote into our server or any endpoint, we must enter a password as a second layer of security. It can also integrate with next-generation firewalls."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
 

Cons

"I recommend adding a data loss prevention (DLP) solution to Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. The inclusion of this feature would allow the application of DLP policies alongside antivirus policies via a single agent and console, making it more competitive as other OEMs often offer DLP solutions as part of their antivirus products."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a strong tool, but it is true that digesting information sometimes makes the tool go a little bit slower."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"It would be good if they could make an exception for applications. Sometimes, it can be a bit of a challenge to make exceptions for certain applications that have been used as rogue."
"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"When an issue occurs, the response time for first-level support and the time taken for meetings could be improved."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"Cortex XDR’s pricing is very reasonable."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"It's quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"You license by the number of days of logs you need to maintain visibility for. Forty-five days is a good solid number for a company with around a 10k user base."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"Price-wise, Sangfor Endpoint Secure can be considered a competitively priced product in the market as it offers quite low prices compared to other solutions."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Media Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
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 Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered. It would be better if it were a simplified version with fewe...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure is easy to handle with its user-friendly interface. The four engines it utilizes for endpoint...
What advice do you have for others considering Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
At first, people might not understand the interface, which is why it should be simplified. However, once they underst...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Fidelis Elevate Platform, Fidelis Enterprise, Fidelis Cloud, Fidelis Managed Detection and Response, Fidelis Deception, Fidelis Decryption, Fidelis Endpoint, Fidelis Network
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
First Midwest Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Fidelis Elevate vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.