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

Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum 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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (8th), Endpoint Compliance (3rd), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (11th)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
35th
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 June 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum is 1.7%, down from 2.8% 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 Networks3.5%
Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum1.7%
Sangfor Endpoint Secure0.8%
Other94.0%
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.
SR
Group CIO at Thal Industries Corporation Ltd
Have maintained strong endpoint protection through behavioral analysis and daily monitoring
I previously mentioned that Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business doesn't have built-in DLP, which was a concern. I think they could add it in the future; however, antivirus cannot provide a proper DLP solution, but they can offer a mix of DLP, similar to Trend Micro Apex One, which provides some sort of DLP file management. Nonetheless, we need a proper DLP solution such as Forcepoint or Symantec, whichever suits us. We'll be conducting performance evaluation in the next quarter while working on other projects. More value means a better GUI, user interface, and comprehensive reporting capabilities. In Sophos, we receive a daily system-generated report about what is happening, plus an alert system. The reporting system in Trend Micro is also excellent; I receive an email every day at 10:00 AM with a report for the last 24 hours.
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 initial setup isn't too bad."
"The anti-exploit is impenetrable."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"Cortex covers everything I need. It's a perfect solution. Cortex provides a different level of visibility because it's an extended EDR, allowing you to grab logs from the network and firewalls. Palo Alto invented the concept of the extended EDR or XDR."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"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 product's most valuable features are massive user and feature intelligence exploit detection."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"I can easily manage over 300 computers antivirus from my desk."
"It is very stable, and effective in combating spam, viruses, Trojans, etc."
"It's easy to use."
"We've been quite happy with the capabilities of the product in general."
"It performs quite well as a firewall protection provider."
"It has improved our performance and deployment."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the firewall, the IPS, and the patch deployment."
"Kaspersky is the best, one of the top three in the world, and I would definitely recommend it to others who are considering implementation."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"I like the tool's honeypot feature. Some features include having a honeypot to detect attacks in a certain area. Additionally, there is RDP protection, which means that when we remote into our server or any endpoint, we must enter a password as a second layer of security. It can also integrate with next-generation firewalls."
"It has a quick response time, threat intelligence, cybersecurity features, quick report generation, behavior analysis, dynamic detection, and quarantine features."
"The tool's AI feature is helpful in endpoint security."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"The user-friendliness of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is particularly impressive. Even with basic technical knowledge, users can easily navigate the system, make changes, and implement updates."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
 

Cons

"It's very time-consuming to log support issues and the people that answer the tickets aren't very knowledgeable."
"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."
"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"The GUI could be improved."
"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"The licensing fees could be reduced."
"The UI, user interface, could be improved."
"The solution can be a bit pricy. Especially if you have to cover many devices, it can get expensive."
"The solution seems incapable of stopping the proxy connection; the proxy server seems to be bypassing the antivirus."
"There have been some performance issues. They provide good security, but this slows down the performance of machines' servers. The software is not updating as frequently as we need."
"It is not very good for the performance of the system, and especially with older devices, it has a noticeable impact."
"This solution would be improved if it were more compatible with Windows Server. There is not a client for Windows Server, like for Windows Workstation, so there are a lot of things you cannot control from the local system, or from the desktop directly. You have to control everything from the policy server, not from the client's side. The interface is kind of light, and it's not good—it could be more user-friendly."
"It's grown more expensive and customers are not happy about it."
"I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
"There are a few areas for improvement. We have encountered licensing issues on occasion, and sometimes updates don't apply properly."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"It would be much more convenient if the migration tool could be installed directly on the customer's VMs, enabling a smoother migration process to the new infrastructure, with potential restrictions addressed accordingly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"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 cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"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."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"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."
"For 300 nodes, we pay about 15,000 Malaysian Ringgit ($3,500 USD)."
"We pay a yearly annual subscription for this product."
"I've heard from my manager that the solution is expensive."
"The solution is comparatively priced."
"I think the price of this solution is good."
"For licensing, we pay a yearly subscription."
"The product is available at a low price."
"It is quite standard, because we use the volume licensing."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"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 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."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
899,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business63
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise33
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 needs improvement with Kaspersky Endpoint Security?
Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business does not have encryption tools. It uses the Windows BitLocker tool, which is...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business?
The pricing and licensing cost of Kaspersky Endpoint Security is cheaper compared to Trend Micro.
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business?
I have good experience in the sales part of Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, not the technical side. I am no...
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 Work Space Security, Kaspersky Endpoint Security
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
ACMS, Arqiva, Pakistan International Airlines, RAO UES
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Next XDR Optimum vs. Sangfor Endpoint Secure and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
899,125 professionals have used our research since 2012.