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

Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations vs Tanium 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
27th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Ransomware Protection (9th)
Tanium
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
22nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (4th), Vulnerability Management (25th), Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (16th), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 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 Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tanium is 1.9%, down from 2.3% 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 Networks3.4%
Tanium1.9%
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations0.8%
Other93.9%
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.
Zunair Aftab - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports Engineer at Rawad IT Solutions
Security features excel while management tools face challenges
Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud has proven to be a robust and comprehensive solution for endpoint protection. So far, no major negative features have been observed. However, email security integration with Microsoft 365 has room for improvement. In a recent real-world incident, a company received 10 phishing emails, of which only three were blocked by the system. Enhancing detection accuracy to block 7 or more would significantly improve trust and effectiveness. With the on-premises version, there's a known issue where assigning a device to a new group results in it being auto-assigned back to the previous group. Fixing this bug would greatly streamline device management. Additionally, in the cloud version, once a device is assigned to a user, it cannot be reassigned without deleting the user or the device entirely. It would be far more user-friendly if the platform allowed simple reassignment or de-assignment, returning the device to an "unassigned" state. As for automated behavioral analysis, while current functionality is based on machine learning, upgrading to true AI-powered detection could bring substantial improvements. Ideally, the system should proactively flag potential threats, and offer administrators the option to either allow or block applications based on intelligent risk analysis
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

"Cortex is a very good total solution on the endpoints."
"It detected stuff that other things wouldn't detect."
"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"My advice for others looking into using Cortex is that it is very easy to use and very useful for the customer environment, whether it's a public or private one."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"They did what they said, and this solution could apply to any scenario."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"Being a cloud solution it is very flexible in serving internal and external connections and a broad range of devices."
"I would say that Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is one of the best, very effective software because of its vulnerability assessment and threat assessments."
"In terms of software performance, it has been effective in providing good security."
"Kaspersky has a Cloud Discovery feature. There is no template in Kaspersky. They provide a temporary risk assessment of the cloud services. For example, if we want to block public storage services like OneDrive or Google Drive, we need to specify each individually. The main difference is that Kaspersky's process takes more time because it requires individual input."
"In Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud, anti-phishing and anti-malware are two very powerful aspects."
"All features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud are perfect, and I am interested in working with Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud."
"I find the EDR service valuable as it adds extra protection and provides a centralized view."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a very good solution for endpoint protection."
"The product works perfectly to prevent malware in our organization."
"When I push a quick update, it's done right away, and I can rescan immediately to confirm completion within minutes."
"The product is granular and can build complex roles compared to other EDR vendors."
"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."
"The solution is scalable and helps to understand how infrastructure works. It helps to improve the health of the organization."
"The solution's technical support is very responsive."
"Tanium is stable and it is also lightweight."
"The security features are very valuable."
 

Cons

"I would like to see better protection, specifically to protect email applications."
"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"For working with the solution, you only really need a web browser, however, we've found that working on Chrome, for example, is horrible."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve its user interface, which is more complicated compared to competitors such as SentinelOne."
"It takes time to scan the servers and devices."
"Recently, there was a company which was attacked by phishing emails, and out of 10, it was only blocking three emails."
"Kaspersky's cloud solution should be improved because the on-premises features are unavailable in the cloud."
"Kaspersky doesn't provide local support."
"Sometimes, the tool consumes a lot of resources from the endpoints, making it an area of concern where improvements are required since it currently consumes a little bit of RAM."
"One area where the product could be improved is in its delivery and installation process."
"It requires specific expertise or certified professionals to deploy the product. There is a need to expand the offerings to various industries covering different-sized businesses."
"Certain shortcomings in the anti-ransomware part of the solution need improvement. XDR and MDR, along with threat hunting, a big step in cybersecurity today, need improvement."
"The tool's update management can be better. In future releases, the addition of a DLP module would be valuable."
"The performance could improve in future releases. We have had performance issues in specialized web environments, but overall I think the problems are less than 2% of the computer systems being used."
"There are some bugs in the product. The tool needs to improve in the area of reporting."
"The main issues are the network connection because different customers have issues with their networks. It's difficult implementing this type of solution because the network is the main feature in the architecture for these types of solutions. Tanium could improve by creating some network optimization."
"The solution can give a lot of false positives."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve the reporting and tracking capabilities."
"Our biggest issue with the solution is its lack of mobility."
"It is not really additional functions, or the features that are needed, rather the complexity would be reduced based on the number of modules required to put together a comprehensive operational security and risk compliance model."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"The price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"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."
"Compared to CrowdStrike, Cortex XDR is an expensive solution."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"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."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The product’s price is flexible."
"The product is averagely priced."
"The pricing is favorable, and there are no additional expenses associated with using the product."
"The solution is moderately priced and cannot be considered an expensive or cheap tool."
"I find Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud more accessible in terms of pricing."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a cost-effective solution."
"The platform is expensive."
"It is higher than some competitors in the market."
"The solution offers value for money."
"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 is expensive but it's a good investment."
"There is an annual license required to use this solution."
"Tanium is a more expensive solution in Latin America than some of the competitors, such as BigFix."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing 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 Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
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,...
What is your primary use case for KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud?
I already have Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud Optimum on my company, karinoware.com. I am working on Kaspersky End...
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
No data available
Tanium Inc Cloud, Tanium XEM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
JPMorgan Chase, eBay, Amazon, US Bank, MetLife, pwc, Cerner, Delphi, MGM Grand, New York Life
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations vs. Tanium and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.