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

Kaspersky Next EDR Optimum vs Malwarebytes Teams 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 Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Kaspersky Next EDR Optimum
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
22nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (25th)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next EDR Optimum is 1.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Malwarebytes Teams is 1.7%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.8%
Kaspersky Next EDR Optimum1.0%
Malwarebytes Teams1.7%
Other93.5%
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

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.
Nadeem Syed - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at Haniya Technologies
Continuous protection has improved automated threat response and reporting for our endpoints
We did work with one of our clients who required mobile security solutions. In my opinion, Trend Micro, when we went through the POCs and other components, we did not find it very strong as far as mobile security is concerned. I think Kaspersky is much better than Trend Micro when it comes to mobile security solutions. From an outside perspective, Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum looks pretty strong and comprehensive. The main improvement would be if they could decrease the cost, as it would be great for clients since it is quite expensive now compared to when it used to be cheaper. The key competitor for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is Trend Micro. Trend Micro is the only competitor in the market right now. I would say both Trend Micro Endpoint Detection and Response and Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum are quite similar; I cannot say that one is better than the other. The difference is mainly in cost; Trend Micro has mostly moved all their products to the cloud, offering no on-premises products now, whereas Kaspersky is still in a transition phase providing both on-premises and cloud solutions. Many clients prefer on-premises as it is less expensive compared to cloud.
reviewer2594097 - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Executive Officer at a wholesaler/distributor with 11-50 employees
Exceptional malware protection with regular updates and behavior-based detection
There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity. The free version is effective, however, the paid version is pricey compared to it. Other customers have mentioned issues with false positives. It lacks enterprise-level management and more enterprise functionality. CrowdStrike and SentinelOne are much more enterprise-grade solutions. Malwarebytes has limited integration with cybersecurity tools and lacks enterprise integrations because it is not an enterprise product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From the Palo Alto side, whatever they buy, they integrate that really well into their integration suite, and that makes a massive difference."
"The product is mostly automated, and we do not have to make decisions, because all the decisions are made by the product itself and we are not required to create any custom policies since the policies that are created are well defined in the product itself."
"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."
"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."
"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 product has an intuitive dashboard."
"I like that the product has behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"The ability to kind of stitch everything together and see the actual complete picture is very useful. I guess you'd call it a playbook. Some people call it the forensics analysis of what was happening on particular endpoints when they detected some malicious behavior, and what transpired before that to cause that. It is also very user friendly. The way they have done everything and integrated all the solutions that they've purchased over the years to make it a very seamless, effective product is very good. One thing about Palo Alto is that they take the products or services that they purchase and make them seamless for the end user as compared to some companies that purchase other companies and then just kind of have their products off to the side or keep different interfaces. Palo Alto doesn't do that."
"Support has been helpful."
"Overall, I would rate Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum an eight out of ten."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The initial setup was easy."
"I mostly like how they capture particular files and submit them to other files, and they have the solution console. And for example, we are using the one in for an application, like, on the RansomFree, if there are any vulnerabilities in patches coming, in the future, they fix these."
"It protects against malware and secures the network."
"The product's most valuable feature is the flexibility of installation with the console and a simple administration strategy."
"The solution is very user friendly, which we appreciate."
"I have just discovered it to be exceptionally good at finding that stuff."
"This solution helps us by providing central management of anti-malware and anti-exploit functionality."
"We don't have to spend any time remediating bad things happening: Not viruses nor ransomware."
"Ten times a day, improved signatures will be downloaded, so it is very up-to-date in terms of malware experience."
"It sits in the background, works very well and does what you expect it to do."
"Being able to cloud manage it from just a cloud login is valuable. We can get to it from anywhere, which is really helpful. The fact that we can remediate from the cloud console is one of our favorite features."
"We have a small IT team, and being able to manage even a small fleet of devices that are out in the field and being able to respond and remediate really quickly from the cloud-based console has been really helpful for us."
"It prevents us from having to re-image computers if they are found to be harboring malware."
 

Cons

"The solution should enhance the ADR and reporting."
"If he is using a smaller company, he can depend on some other tools because Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a bit expensive."
"Whenever the tool releases a new version when deploying the product across the organization, I feel like there are some disturbances in the CPU usage after upgrading the tool to the latest version."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"While using Cortex, I noticed some aspects that could be improved, such as increasing the synchronization speed between XDR and Xnor."
"However, if you do not have Palo Alto in your environment, you are paying these additional services just for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, so it is not a cost-effective solution."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"For Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, if I had to point out improvements, I would say the UI is still somewhat difficult for beginners."
"I want Kaspersky to extend its products to internet protection. For example, I would like them to develop a firewall integrated with EDR."
"The central management needs improvement. The ease of use for updating and managing through the web console is difficult and lacks features."
"I want the tool’s pricing to improve."
"The product could be improved by resolving the problem with uninstalling devices. The uninstallation needs better handling, specifically with automatic license deletions."
"The support of Kaspersky rates a five out of ten. The response time is not very fast, and many times the answers are not very precise."
"The solution can improve the uninstallation process. The removal of the agent can be difficult. The purpose is for security, but it requires a lot of time and sometimes a special tool."
"What I want to be added to Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is a single pane of glass management, where everything is integrated into a single pane of glass."
"We would like more data to be available from this solution, in order for it to be usable in strategic decision making."
"It's not covering everything as we just started in EDR. In Malwarebytes, there's no response. The response is very limited, and integration is very limited."
"There are no built-in backups or integrated backup options, which could be an opportunity."
"We had a little performance problem with the solution, but that's been resolved. Since then, it's been running well."
"I would like to see integration with other vendors going forward."
"The technical support could be improved; we find we have to make several requests before an issue is looked into."
"Malwarebytes is too simplistic. From a SOC IR perspective, it doesn't give you very much data around it. It doesn't tie things or provide SHA-1 and SHA-256 detection information, which makes it hard to do an additional investigation."
"We experience a lot of false positives."
"The product could be improved in blocking malicious traffic, such as communication with known malicious IP addresses."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"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."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"This is an expensive solution."
"Kaspersky gives a consolidated price with a good solution. If we choose something else, we need to add other options on our own."
"The price is good, not too high."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is more affordable than the endpoint security product of Fortinet. Whether it's worth the money depends on your security strategy."
"The tool’s pricing is yearly. The solution’s pricing is expensive."
"The price of the solution is reasonable. It cost approximately €10,000 annually."
"The solution could be made a bit cheaper."
"The pricing is totally reasonable."
"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. You need to pay about 80,000 rupees yearly for the tool. There are no additional costs associated with the product."
"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"Yearly, it is around $50 per client."
"I would say that it's affordable. It costs much less than Sentinel One, CrowdStrike, or anything of that nature. But, at the same time, you are getting what you pay for. So I would say it's one of the best when you're comparing traditional NextGen AVs like Webroot that aren't the best in the bunch."
"The licensing is per seat, with clients being a little less expensive than servers. If we need more licenses, we can accomplish that within a day. As Malwarebytes adds new features to their product, such as DNS filtering and a patching module, they want to charge us more even though we're a premium user, which isn't ideal."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price and ten is a high price, I rate the product's pricing a seven."
"It is really expensive. We've got between 30 and 40 licenses every year, and for the number of licenses that we have, we're finding that Malwarebytes on average costs between $900 and $1,000 more per year than comparable options. We're paying about $3,300 per year for these licenses. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise53
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise6
 

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 experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum?
Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum is reasonably priced for the market. I do not know the exact cost o...
What needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum?
We did work with one of our clients who required mobile security solutions. In my opinion, Trend Micro, when we went ...
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Optimum?
When it comes to endpoint security requirements, we work with Trend Micro most of the time; currently, my focus is mo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Malwarebytes?
I really hate the automatic rebilling without officially confirming it with me. It's an annoyance and they should at ...
What needs improvement with Malwarebytes?
It takes up too much space when it's trying to run in the background.
What is your primary use case for Malwarebytes?
My primary use case is that it's protecting me against malware.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Knutson Construction
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Next EDR Optimum vs. Malwarebytes Teams and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.