Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Microsoft and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Microsoft is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.4, while OpenText is ranked #43. Microsoft holds a 7.0% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compete in the comprehensive security solutions category. Microsoft Defender appears to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration within Windows environments, advanced threat detection, and response capabilities, making it particularly advantageous for organizations heavily using Microsoft services.

Features: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides seamless integration with Windows environments, robust threat detection, and automatic attack disruption. Its advanced response capabilities and detailed threat analytics are beneficial in maintaining security. On the other hand, OpenText Core Endpoint Protection focuses on delivering solid protection, although its integration and feature set may not be as extensive as Microsoft's offering.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection could improve its handling of threats like CryptoLock and enhance its reporting capabilities, which often lack detail. Meanwhile, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can work on simplifying its user interface, enhancing reporting capabilities, and reducing false positives. Both products should focus on improving threat detection accuracy and minimizing performance impacts.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection provides flexible deployment options across public, hybrid, and on-premises environments, but faces criticism on customer service wait times. Microsoft's Defender for Endpoint, widely deployable across hybrid and cloud environments, offers versatility and significant integration advantages for Microsoft service users. However, its extensive support options can also result in response delays.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText is recognized for its affordability, appealing to companies seeking cost-effective endpoint solutions. Although Microsoft Defender for Endpoint may appear expensive initially, when combined with broader enterprise licenses, it becomes cost-effective by offering extensive features and integration benefits. Both products deliver ROI, with Defender's value becoming more evident when leveraging Microsoft's comprehensive suite.

To learn more, read our detailed Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 894,830 peers since 2012

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...

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.6%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is 7.0%, down from 10.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint	7.0%
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.6%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.5%
Other	87.9%

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

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.

Read full review

Robert Arbuckle

Security Analyst III at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees

Automatically isolates threats and integrates with logging to reduce response time

Overall, I would evaluate the Microsoft support level that I receive at probably about a seven, but that depends on the day. It has been spotty. We have had issues where the urgency level of the Microsoft support is not as high as ours, especially during a data breach or potential data breach situation. We have had issues with some of the offshore support being lackluster. One specific thing that comes to mind is we were on a support call with our CISO on the call, and the Microsoft agent, who did not actually work for Microsoft, is one of the vendors that Microsoft uses for support, said, "Just to set expectations, my lunch break is in an hour and I am going to go away then." For us, it was already ten o'clock at night and we had been working on this for a couple of hours, trying to get a security engineer on with us. For him to tell us that he was going to go away and have lunch, it was, "Okay, but go find somebody else if you need to." It was just the lackluster approach, and it seemed like he did not really care. We seem to get a lot of this when we get non-Microsoft support. I can identify areas for improvement with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, as it is kind of a convoluted mess to try to take care of false positives. Especially when they have been identified as false positives but they keep going off over and over again. It is great for my pocketbook because it generates a lot of on-call action, but I would really prefer more sleep at two o'clock in the morning than dealing with false positives. I would say that the unified portal for managing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is suitable for both teams as they are all in there. It would be great if they would stop moving things around and renaming things, which makes sense. The new XDR portal is pretty nice. Being able to have it central again inside of the regular Security Center without having to open up two windows is helpful. Overall, I think it is pretty good. There is always going to be something that could be improved, such as alerting and the ability to modify alerts would be a little bit helpful to have. Being able to add more data into the alerts and turn off alerts that are not as useful would be beneficial. It is hard to say what the quantitative impact the security exposure management feature has had on our company's security, because a lot of it is kind of subjective. I think we are sitting at around a fifty percent score still, and a lot of it is just kind of unusual circumstances that we cannot really implement without breaking the organization.

Read full review

reviewer2584380

vCIO At Grove Networks Inc. at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

Improving threat detection is critical for enhanced protection

We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the contract we have with our clients as a cost-effective option for antivirus protection Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is cost-effective for rolling it out to all of our clients,…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's stability is generally good."

"The solution allows us to gain remote access without the user's knowledge and take the necessary actions on the device."

"The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service."

"They did what they said, and this solution could apply to any scenario."

"Cortex XDR alerts us on the dashboard when there's a threat, which allows us to restrict that user and helps secure our infrastructure."

"I don't have to do much monitoring with it; I don't have to have anybody manually looking at this, it gives us reports, and it lets us know if something needs to be addressed, and we can easily address it."

"The live terminal is probably the best thing ever. It gives you the access to get straight onto any machine."

"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."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"The EDR feature is most valuable."

"We saw a return on our investment within the first two years."

"There is no licensing fee, as Microsoft Defender for Endpoint comes included with the Windows license."

"It's very easy to scale because it comes built-in with Windows 10, and you just need to enable it. This can be done on scale using group policies or through Endpoint Manager on cloud or Intune."

"What I like best is that it is part of the operating system, as opposed to a third-party application."

"In my opinion, the most valuable aspects are the reporting analytics and integration with Sentinel. Defender does an excellent job of correlating the different entities that comprise threat analysis, analytics data, and log analytics. It helps to piece together investigations into any exploit or malicious activity within a specific tenant. AI and analytics tools are probably the most valuable components."

"The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are the ease of use and it was available within the operating system."

"Technical support is good."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pros

"The feature we found most valuable is the AI functionality for maintaining endpoint security, which is very powerful and has been useful over the last year."

"Low performance requirements."

"It is very light, it is the only solution that can be installed on a machine that already has an antivirus, and it is a pretty complete solution."

"I haven't observed any of the instabilities in the solution. It is a stable solution."

"The most valuable features of the solution include the endpoint navigation protection, the protection related to the EMS service, as well as the control and the cloud integration capabilities."

"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."

"Its ease of installation is valuable. It has been a low-resource tool and the continuous updates in the past have made it attractive from the standpoint of the trust level on the protection."

"Speed"

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"The tool needs to be improved in terms of integration and interface."

"Currently, we are monitoring all USB drives and ports but we would like to improve our device control capabilities."

"Although I would say this product is highly-rated, it could probably do more because nothing does everything that you want."

"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."

"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."

"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."

"If they had pulse rate detection, it would be better."

"Cortex XDR could improve its sales support team, including better commission structures and referral programs."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"It makes your Surface devices hot. It is resource-intensive."

"I would like to see better integration with their other security products to give better visibility from a higher level."

"The technical from Microsoft could be better. It is not as good as other solutions."

"We would like more customization, actually."

"It can get a bit laggy sometimes."

"The solution could improve by providing more integration."

"Everything can be cheaper I am sure. So, it could be less expansive."

"I rate Microsoft support seven out of ten. I had some cases a while back and told an agent my issue, and when I called the next day, I had to explain everything again to a different person, so I found it annoying to repeat myself all over."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint cons

"An updated UI would be nice, but is not hardly used."

"We were attacked by CryptoLock. It didn't protect us in the way we needed to and an attack was able to get through their defenses."

"Webroot is very reactionary. It waits until the threat is active within memory to try and detect it. They need better pre-execution detection and prevention."

"Reporting system could be improved."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats."

"There should be a Webroot Business Endpoint Protection mobile app."

"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."

"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 pricing is a little bit on the expensive side."

"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."

"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."

"I feel it is fairly priced."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"It is free."

"Pricing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is competitive. Out of the bundle, you will get a lot of security, if I talk about Microsoft E5, for example, and get a lot of benefits. If the customer goes and purchases a different solution, it will cost more, so pricing for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is quite reasonable at the moment. There isn't any challenge in terms of pricing, for example, I didn't see a customer who pulled back because of the price. Some prices could be negotiable, and sometimes, as a sales point, the two become negotiable, but they don't bill one and pull back because of the pricing. If you have an E5 license, you get everything."

"The solution is free with Windows."

"I got it with the Microsoft Windows license."

"The solution is an open source version and was free with a paid version of Windows 10."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is included with a Microsoft E5 license."

"It isn't cheap, but it's reasonable and fair."

"The solution comes as a part of Windows 10 and it is covered under its license."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pricing and cost advice

"Work on a price tier plan."

"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."

"The solution is very cost-effective."

"The pricing is high."

"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."

"I can't recall the exact pricing, but I believe there is a monthly fee of $20-30 per user."

"Webroot is less expensive than SentinelOne."

"Get a trial, then a multi-year license."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

894,830 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Construction Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	46
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	49

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	82
Midsize Enterprise	45
Large Enterprise	96

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	35
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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. ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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,...

See all answers

Which offers better endpoint security - Symantec or Microsoft Defender?

We use Symantec because we do not use MS Enterprise products, but in my opinion, Microsoft Defender is a superior sol...

See all answers

How does Microsoft Defender for Endpoint compare with Crowdstrike Falcon?

The CrowdStrike solution delivers a lot of information about incidents. It has a very light sensor that will never pu...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

We have been discussing pricing, setup cost, and licensing, and we are currently on an E3. We are discussing going to...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is probably on the cheaper side, so I would rate their pricing a one or a two ou...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to improve its ability to detect threats. It does not do what it's adverti...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Webroot Business Endpoint Protection?

We use Webroot Business Endpoint Protection as a NextGen antivirus solution for our clients. It's included in the con...

See all answers

Comparisons

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 5% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

Trellix Endpoint Security Platform vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 4% of the time

HP Wolf Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

F-Secure Total vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 2% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Competitors

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 5% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Malwarebytes Teams vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

May 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

May 2026

Download Microsoft Defender for Endpoint product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

May 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection report

Download OpenText Core Endpoint Protection product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

Microsoft Defender ATP, Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection, MS Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender Antivirus

Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Palo Alto Networks

Microsoft

Demo not available

OpenText

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint provides comprehensive threat protection that integrates well with current systems, offering proactive threat detection and automatic updates while reducing manual efforts.

The platform is designed for seamless integration with Microsoft products, facilitating efficient management and use. It offers proactive ransomware protection and valuable threat intelligence, crucial for timely response and increased visibility across devices. Users highlight its ability to secure endpoints from viruses and malware, integrating with Windows and Office 365 to enhance real-time detection capabilities in diverse environments, including hybrid and on-premises setups. However, enhancements are needed in Linux integration, detection accuracy, and policy implementations.

What are the key features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

Seamless Integration: Works smoothly with existing systems and Microsoft products for easy management.
Proactive Threat Detection: Advanced monitoring to identify and mitigate threats swiftly.
Ransomware Protection: Built-in features to protect against ransomware attacks automatically.
Centralized Management: Unified platform for better device visibility and collaboration.
Threat Intelligence: Provides critical data for rapid threat response.

What benefits should be evaluated in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint?

Cost-Effectiveness: Part of Windows bundles, offering comprehensive security at competitive pricing.
Time Efficiency: Reduces manual oversight with automatic updates and management ease.
Real-Time Detection: Enhanced security through seamless Office 365 and Windows integration.
Device Coverage: Supports hybrid and on-premises environments for varied digital infrastructures.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is implemented across industries for securing endpoints, relying on its deep integration with Windows and Office 365 to protect against malware and viruses. Organizations benefit from its real-time detection and comprehensive management capabilities, particularly in hybrid environments where diverse digital infrastructures need safeguarding.

Microsoft

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers cloud-managed endpoint security with AI integration, providing real-time protection and lightweight performance. It ensures low system impact, seamless cloud integration, and cost-effective security solutions for various devices.

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is a comprehensive endpoint security platform utilized by managed-service providers for antivirus and firewall functionality across servers, workstations, and mobile devices. It employs AI for robust threat detection, integrating with cloud applications for real-time updates. Multi-layered security features include malware protection, network defense, and DNS protection. Although connectivity and threat reporting need improvement, this platform extensively supports remote device management and integrates efficiently with Active Directory policies.

What are the key features of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Cloud Management: Centralized admin console for easy oversight
AI Integration: Enhanced threat detection capabilities
Lightweight Performance: Minimal impact on system resources
Real-time Threat Database: Constant updates for effective protection
Web Control Interface: Monitors and controls web traffic

What benefits are associated with OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Ease of Setup and Maintenance: Facilitates quick deployment and upkeep
Seamless Cloud Integration: Simplifies scalability and operation
Cost-Effectiveness: Affordable pricing with comprehensive features
Mobile Security Capabilities: Supports remote device management

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection finds application in industries requiring stringent data protection and peace of mind over device security. Managed-service providers implement this for comprehensive antivirus and firewall features, safeguarding multi-device networks. It is particularly useful for DNS protection and integrating with Active Directory policies, enabling secure yet flexible operations across sectors.

OpenText

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health

Mytech Partners

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

April 2026

Free Report: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

894,830 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection report.

See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.