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

Fidelis Elevate 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)
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)
Zscaler Client Connector
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
25th
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 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 Zscaler Client Connector is 0.6%, up from 0.3% 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%
Zscaler Client Connector0.6%
Fidelis Elevate1.0%
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.
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.
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

"It has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, and I have used it to verify hashes or domains to identify malicious activity, trigger playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."
"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."
"The product has an intuitive dashboard."
"The product is very good, it has caught a lot of exploits that most products would not."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"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."
"The technical support is very helpful."
"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."
"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 solution's technical support is perfect, so I rate the technical support a ten out of ten"
"It ensures the stability of network behavior across various aspects of our network and offers responsive capabilities to address incidents promptly"
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"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."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"Zscaler Client Connector is quite scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine or ten out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"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."
"I'd rate the solution nine out of ten."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
"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."
 

Cons

"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"This is a very costly product."
"The main issue I could point out is the offline agents and the way that it is missing."
"It'll help if customization was easier."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"Fine-tuning the detection policy requires experience because the policy is very complex in Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and we get high false positive alerts."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"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."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"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 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."
"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 a hard learning curve for Zscaler Client Connector; their support isn't the greatest all the time."
"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 room for improvement regarding the price of Zscaler Client Connector, as it is one of the most expensive solutions available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"The price was fine."
"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 cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"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."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"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."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product. My company makes yearly payments toward the licensing cost of the solution."
Information not available
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%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

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 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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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
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. Zscaler Client Connector and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.