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

Fidelis Elevate vs Upwind comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Fidelis Elevate
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (56th), Threat Deception Platforms (8th), SSL/TLS Decryption (4th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (22nd), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (32nd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (45th)
Upwind
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (40th), Container Security (27th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (20th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (28th), API Security (12th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (25th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (28th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (13th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (18th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (8th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (7th), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (14th), AI Security (10th)
 

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.
Mohammed Mudasser - PeerSpot reviewer
AI/ML Engineer at a educational organization with 5,001-10,000 employees
Runtime context has transformed how we prioritize exploitable cloud risks and protect workloads
I appreciate runtime context, which helps connect vulnerabilities and misconfigurations with actual workload behavior and network relationships, making it easier to prioritize remediation based on real exposure rather than simply working through a long list of security findings. The best features that stand out to me are contextual vulnerability prioritization, cloud workload visibility, and runtime security. I especially value how Upwind connects vulnerabilities with actual runtime behavior, which helps focus on exploitable risk rather than working through a long list of findings. It has helped us focus on actual exploitable risk instead of treating every vulnerability equally. By considering runtime activity, exposure, reachability, and sensitive data context, the team can prioritize remediation much faster and reduce unnecessary alert noise. I also value the runtime visibility and attack path context because it connects security findings with network behavior and actual workload. This makes investigations more actionable and helps the team move from simply detecting issues to understanding their real impact. The biggest positive impact has been the prioritization of cloud security risk and improved visibility. Instead of chasing every vulnerability, we can focus on issues that are actually exposed or active at runtime, which makes the security team more efficient and remediation more targeted.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The normal protection was really effective, and we detected situations that if we didn't have Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it's highly likely that we would have been affected, but it protected the infrastructure."
"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 main benefit of using Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks while employing Palo Alto Firewall at the internet edge is that it improves security on our endpoint devices, integrating seamlessly with Palo Alto Firewalls to deliver comprehensive network, analyst, and security details all in a single dashboard, which allows us to manage everything from our network devices."
"It's a perfect solution. It integrates well into the environment."
"We use Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks for its ability to detect based on behavior rather than simple virus scan to prevent malicious activities."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the user interface."
"Cortex XDR alerts us on the dashboard when there's a threat, which allows us to restrict that user and helps secure our infrastructure."
"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."
"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 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."
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"The technical support is very helpful."
"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."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"Upwind has positively impacted my organization by reducing time to action and time to response by half."
"My advice for others looking into using Upwind is that if you are seeking a strong CNAPP with an advanced runtime and strong CDR capabilities, this is the product."
"They are a great overall cloud security platform and they continue innovating and adding new features."
"The combination of runtime visibility, security insights, and contextual risk prioritization makes it much easier to focus on the risks that actually matter."
"Now, thanks to Upwind, everything is automated and I am saving around six hours per week since switching to Upwind."
 

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."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"I have faced some issues with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks; there is room for improvement in the sense that certain options prevent us from seeing and segregating data."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"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."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"The deployment is pretty hard."
"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."
"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. 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."
"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 interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"Upwind can be improved because its UI is a bit difficult to navigate."
"I believe the user interface can use improvement because some features are quite tricky to find since they are not where you would expect them to be, but with enough time, you are able to find them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"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."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"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."
"It's somehow expensive. From one to ten, I would rate it a five. They need to improve the prices. It's very high."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed Detection and Response (MDR) solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise57
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise2
No data available
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Upwind?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing process were pretty reasonable.
What needs improvement with Upwind?
I would appreciate more customizable dashboards and reporting for different teams, such as security operations, engin...
What is your primary use case for Upwind?
My main use case for Upwind is cloud security and workload protection. I primarily use it to gain visibility into clo...
 

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
Upwind Security Upwind Platform for AWS Security Hub, Upwind Security Upwind for AWS Security Hub Extended
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
First Midwest Bank
StockX, Yotpo, bill, Digital Turbine, nanit, CallRail, boomi
Find out what your peers are saying about Fidelis Elevate vs. Upwind and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.