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

Fidelis Elevate vs Tanium comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 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)
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
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 (10th), SSL/TLS Decryption (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (23rd), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (32nd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (36th)
Tanium
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (3rd), Vulnerability Management (23rd), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (19th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fidelis Elevate is 0.8%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tanium is 2.0%, down from 2.4% 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 Networks3.4%
Tanium2.0%
Fidelis Elevate0.8%
Other93.8%
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.
MA
Division Manager, Information Technology at a legal firm with 51-200 employees
Centralized policies have improved remote endpoint control and have simplified data visibility
The integration is not simple and easy. It requires experienced users or people who have done the implementation. When certain policies are applied, they do not immediately push the policies. For example, we manage endpoint device USB access. We set a policy to block it, but it does not come into effect immediately. Sometimes it takes three or four days for it to reflect. That is a pain point. I have raised this issue with support as well, but they said that I need to limit the number of devices in the policy. In terms of application deployment, for us, it was seamless.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"I have found the solution to be very easy in respect of the integration and configurable."
"I generally believe that Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is probably the best in the market right now."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks's ability to block sophisticated threats in real time is quite good and is on par with SentinelOne's."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"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."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"The solution is pretty scalable; you buy a lot of features, a known product, and you want it to run in any environment, and it does, so it's scalable enough."
"The technical support is very helpful."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity; it covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"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 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."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"I like the tool's incident response and security patching."
"The interrogation piece was the most valuable feature because it was very detailed."
"Tanium is stable and it is also lightweight."
"Tanium's most valuable feature is its instant discovery aspect."
"Tanium's most valuable features are patch management, inventory, and distribution software."
"Tanium has made the process of detecting threats more proactive with its detection, so the process is easier and more efficient."
"Tanium has made the process of detecting threats more proactive with its detection. So, the process is easier and more efficient."
"Tanium is a very good product and I would rate it eight or nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"The downsides of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks are that in many incidents, when I enter the causality chain, there are numerous logs."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"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."
"The solution lacks mobility."
"The most painful thing is the interface. It's a bit unclear sometimes."
"There are downsides and drawbacks in Tanium, and there is room for improvement from my perspective."
"The solution needs to improve the reporting and tracking capabilities."
"We set a policy to block USB access. The moment a device is being set up on the network, I apply the policy, but it does not come into effect immediately."
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
"When working with Tanium, there are some older devices that haven't been patched for a long time, and certain patches are not included in Tanium. I have to search outside to download patches, create bundles, and then perform the task."
"Most of the time, agent-relative issues have to be more equipped with self-healing features. At times, the agent is there, but for some reason, it doesn't report a status. It gives certain problems that are obviously agent-based."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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's pricing is ok."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"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."
"Very costly product."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"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 quite expensive but we can customize it to reduce the price."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
"There is an annual license required to use this solution."
"It's an expensive solution. It would be nice if the cost were lower."
"The product's pricing differs from region to region depending on negotiations and the number of endpoints."
"The solution offers value for money."
"Tanium is a more expensive solution in Latin America than some of the competitors, such as BigFix."
"The solution is expensive but it's a good investment."
"It is higher than some competitors in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
 

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 Tanium?
While there is always room for improvement, I am pleased with Tanium.
What is your primary use case for Tanium?
The primary use case for Tanium ( /products/tanium-reviews ) is compliance, patching, and inventory as part of the co...
What advice do you have for others considering Tanium?
For smaller companies, Tanium is quite a big investment, and one needs to have a considerable setup to make it econom...
 

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
Tanium Inc Cloud, Tanium XEM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
First Midwest Bank
JPMorgan Chase, eBay, Amazon, US Bank, MetLife, pwc, Cerner, Delphi, MGM Grand, New York Life
Find out what your peers are saying about Fidelis Elevate vs. Tanium and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.