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

Kaspersky Next EDR Expert vs Sangfor Endpoint Secure comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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
109
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Kaspersky Next EDR Expert
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
28th
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 April 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next EDR Expert is 1.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is 0.8%, 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 Networks3.4%
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert1.3%
Sangfor Endpoint Secure0.8%
Other94.5%
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.
Ravi-Upadhyay - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Inspira Enterprise
Provides strong threat detection and response through behavior analytics and network isolation
I have found the most valuable features of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert to be its ability to tackle the biggest challenges customers face when they have to mitigate any kind of a malware, ransomware attack, or online theft scenarios. The solution utilizes its HIPS, which is the host intrusion prevention system, behavior analytics system, and device control mechanism, making the antivirus capabilities of EDR quite strong. It is able to detect zero-day threats as well as historical or legacy malware, providing protection against current threats in the market and legacy malware. My opinion on the advanced threat detection algorithms in Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert is that the ATP functionality is quite strong because it utilizes the behavioral analytics engine in the backend, which employs machine learning mechanisms to identify any kind of vulnerability or exploit running on the operating system level and the network level. If an attack is about to happen on the endpoint, it is able to protect over the network as well and checks for any illegitimate encryption activities. The machine learning capability within Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert has contributed to improving detection accuracy and reducing false positives in my environment by helping me identify malicious activity and differentiate between any malicious activity on the operating system level and on the network level. I have seen customers with in-house developed applications that have no public signatures available. Once I whitelist a particular application, it intelligently whitelists not only the executable but also all the dependent services required to run that application. Furthermore, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert has successfully blocked network-level attacks on the endpoint. For example, during a recent DoS attack aimed at choking the entire network, Kaspersky detected the attack, isolated the device in a sandbox network, and alerted my SOC team via email for corrective action, thereby proactively helping me detect and protect devices from malicious attacks.
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 tool is easy to use."
"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."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, collecting relevant indicators such as hashes, IP addresses, or domains efficiently and can detect and block malicious attacks with firewalls."
"The product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"The installation of the physical servers is very simple, but the software is not that simple."
"EDR's most valuable feature is its basic protection from malware and viruses."
"In summary, I think that Kaspersky is a good product to use."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert has successfully blocked network-level attacks on the endpoint, detecting the attack, isolating the device in a sandbox network, and alerting my SOC team via email for corrective action, thereby proactively helping me detect and protect devices from malicious attacks."
"Kaspersky is easy to use, and it performs well."
"The solution does a good job of filtering and blocking unusual traffic."
"The product has an easy-to-use EDR module based on signature-based antivirus detection. It is a complete software."
"What I like best about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is that it can detect any cyber attack and that it's a reliable product in the cybersecurity space. My company has confidence in it as a product for detecting all cyber attacks. It's a reliable product."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"It has a quick response time, threat intelligence, cybersecurity features, quick report generation, behavior analysis, dynamic detection, and quarantine features."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"The tool's AI feature is helpful in endpoint security."
 

Cons

"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information."
"The solution should offer more dashboards and they should be better customized."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"As an improvement, I would like to see enhanced connection speeds."
"The product's pricing could be better."
"There are a large number of false positives."
"We would like to have better strategic information."
"It is not easy to follow the kill chain of a potential infection or malware."
"Device control is lacking in EDR."
"The main problem with Endpoint is that Kaspersky is a Russian company, and my clients prefer not to use it."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is very heavy on the system resources. It uses a lot of memory and the system can become slow."
"The issue with Kaspersky EDR is the sandbox. I'd like to have the ability to manage it on the cloud as well."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response could improve some issues and add new security files."
"My opinion is that behavior detection could work better. This feature gets a high rate of false positives."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"When an issue occurs, the response time for first-level support and the time taken for meetings could be improved."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"The price was fine."
"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."
"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"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."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"Endpoint's pricing is good, especially compared to expensive solutions like Sophos."
"Kaspersky's pricing is very competitive when it comes to comparison with the other solutions."
"Pricing for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is so-so when you compare it with its competitors. Its pricing isn't cheap nor expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is okay."
"The price of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response is in the middle range compared to competitors. The pricing model is based on the users using the solutions. The cost for us is approximately 2200 Algerian dinars. The price of the solution could be reduced."
"The solution isn't the cheapest considering what you get. I would rate the pricing as seven out of ten."
"The product has a valuable pricing model. We need to purchase its monthly subscription."
"The solution is worth its cost so I rate pricing a ten out of ten."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
886,174 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Media Company
6%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise48
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise18
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,...
What do you like most about Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert?
The integration with our hypervisor is quite smooth, especially within the Kaspersky Enterprise environment. We have ...
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert?
The user interface of Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert could be more intuitive, and I would appreciat...
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
Kaspersky EDR
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Ferrari, Insolar, Tael, Republic of Serbia
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Next EDR Expert vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
886,174 professionals have used our research since 2012.