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

Malwarebytes Teams vs WatchGuard EPDR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 15, 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
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Malwarebytes Teams
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WatchGuard EPDR
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Malwarebytes Teams is 1.6%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard EPDR is 1.5%, down from 2.1% 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%
WatchGuard EPDR1.5%
Malwarebytes Teams1.6%
Other93.1%
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.
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.
Petri Alhainen - PeerSpot reviewer
Administrator at Sulbana Oy
Balanced endpoint protection has improved forensic visibility and speeds threat investigation
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific to say that you should do this or that. They are listening to the users, so they are fixing things as they've been found. I don't have any example to give. The pricing is always a thing where you need to be in the line that the balance to get it right is a challenging thing with WatchGuard EPDR. If you have good features, then you can have a little bigger price, but if you just get the balance right, that's important. I haven't used automated incident response in WatchGuard EPDR.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Stability is one of the features we like the most."
"We use it for malicious connections from malicious websites, to identify payloads that might be inside the traffic, to identify malicious processes or bugs that are running on the network, and any activities that tend to lead to data infiltration."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"Cortex XDR features advanced threat detection capabilities."
"We have found in our test Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to be a very good tool."
"The policy configuration is great, the granularity of policies that are available is very helpful, it is straightforward to set up, and it has pretty much everything we need and works well within the Palo Alto ecosystem."
"Cortex XDR is a very capable solution for protecting large networks and a lot of endpoints. It's very useful because the automation is very high, and if you combine it with the features on Palo Alto firewalls, it provides very strong protection."
"So far, the solution has done a good job of protecting us from malicious items, such as ransomware, among other things."
"It is intuitive and easy to use. For the most part, it does a good job of catching things. It is good at stopping stuff. I did a couple of tests with a password cracker. I tried to load that on, and Malwarebytes didn't let me do that, which was pretty good. It has a rollback feature that I haven't seen with any other company. If one of your endpoints are hit with mass ransomware, you could actually roll it back. I watched a demo of them do that, and it was pretty sweet."
"I commonly recommend Malwarebytes to people due to the fact that I find it quite reliable."
"The platform is straightforward to install."
"Considering the overall management of the system and seeing what is being protected, it is doing a great job."
"The solution was successfully deployed and so far has been able to stop all ransomware attacks, which has been extremely beneficial to the organization."
"I never have to look at it or do anything with it, and then my system just stays clean."
"I have just discovered it to be exceptionally good at finding that stuff."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter application control."
"Since implementing this solution, we have not had any trouble with malware."
"The interface is great."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that I like the tool's UI, ease of management, ease of making reports, and the ability to export information easily."
"Technical support has always been top-notch when you can get through."
"The most valuable part of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is its overall effectiveness as a good and decent security solution, providing comprehensive security which improves protection for devices significantly."
"The core functionality of the product is very impressive and I recommend that people use it."
"The deployment of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is easy and convenient."
 

Cons

"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."
"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."
"On the pricing aspect, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks needs to have a more reasonable rate, particularly for customers in Sri Lanka and Asian countries."
"It would be better if they could educate the customers more. Some sort of seminars and roadshows will help educate the customers and show what the product can do. The price could be better. It would also help if they had a team for deployment and support."
"The solution should enhance the ADR and reporting."
"Cortex XDR should have a lightweight agent, and the agent size should not be heavy."
"Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis."
"To jump from the partner to Palo Alto directly was challenging."
"There is room for improvement in the way it is deployed, in terms of being able to distribute it. Right now we have to get our hands on a machine to deploy it. It would be nice if there was an easier system."
"A solution must be installed in the main gateway to give an overview of the incoming and outgoing traffic. The technical support team's response time should be faster."
"The product is a little bit more expensive than the other brands."
"I would like to see a little more detail in the log. So, when an event occurs, I'd like to know not just when it happened and on what device, but what activity was taking place on the machine at the time so that we can drill down. If we get a false positive, we have to do a lot of research and go back and forth with our end-users to know why it was a false positive. So, having a little more detail around detections and events would probably be my most asked feature."
"Malwarebytes should improve its mobile compatibility."
"There hasn't been an ROI because we haven't had an event that would cause this software to do something. Therefore, at this point, it has just been a cost to us because we haven't gotten anything out of it."
"I'd like to see increased efficiency in terms of detecting false positives because we sometimes have cases where detections are repeated despite requests for them to be identified as false positives."
"They could come up with better reporting capabilities."
"I would like to see better data protection, for instance using fingerprints to log in."
"It needs some improvements in the DNS security feature. Currently, it does not have full DNS security. It only has semi-DNS security, which can be improved. It is an important feature for us, and it would be really good if they can improve the DNS security feature. Our group has some plans to change to Cisco AMP, which has features such as DNS, Umbrella. We are trying to learn about Cisco AMP and compare it with Panda."
"The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe."
"Occasionally, we suffer from little bugs that give us the wrong message."
"I'd like them to offer a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether they are valid."
"Only the DNS filtering part could be improved, and nothing else apart from this needs correction."
"WatchGuard EPDR does have areas for improvement. One significant gap is the lack of a virtual patching feature integrated into the endpoint security. This would be particularly useful for endpoints running operating systems that are no longer supported, such as Windows 7."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense can improve by including the intrusion and prevention system not only on their most expensive platform. Additionally, it blocks software that is legitimate from users. They complain and then we have to manually unblock the software, by hash, or we receive a message. Some of the prevention features are not available and this might cause us to need a separate firewall or something to protect the company."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"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."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"I am using the Community edition."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"Its licensing is annual. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fee."
"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."
"I believe the retail price is between $40 and $50 per copy."
"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."
"Its cost is around $60 a machine. The cost of the total solution for 250 people is about $8,500 a year. If we add EDR to it, it will bring that cost up to about $15,000. The cost for Carbon Black is about $25,000, which is $10,000 more, but you get all AI functions with it."
"Malwarebytes is a cost-effective product."
"The cost may be something in the ballpark of $20-25 a year per computer."
"I rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
"Customers need to pay monthly licensing costs for Panda Security Adaptive Defense, which is not expensive."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"The product is available at a high price."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise2
 

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 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.
What needs improvement with WatchGuard EPDR?
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard EPDR?
I'm talking about WatchGuard EPDR, which is endpoint protection. I try to remember if we have them in our system, and...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Knutson Construction
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about Malwarebytes Teams vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.