Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Microsoft and Qualys are both solutions in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category. Microsoft is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.4, while Qualys is ranked #77. Microsoft holds a 5.5% mindshare in EDR, compared to Qualys’s 0.4% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Qualys users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Qualys Multi-Vector EDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about SentinelOne, CrowdStrike, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR).

To learn more, read our detailed Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 912,818 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 September 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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 5.5%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint	5.5%
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.6%
Qualys Multi-Vector EDR	0.4%
Other	90.5%

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

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

reviewer1668453

Director, Security Innovation at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

Provides contextual alerts and risk ratings on findings

It's kind of difficult to quantify areas for improvement. In the larger picture, one challenge is that the NDR space is very crowded today. I can mention half a dozen names just off the top of my head. There are at least 12 to 20 different players. All of them are well-known brand names, and it's difficult to compare them. They all claim to be giving you the same network difference capability: catching malware, dealing with all the minor taxonomy of attack, all that. Still, it's very difficult to compare them side by side because they all do things a little differently, and they all have different presentations and output. We haven't deployed it, so I can't give you what we felt about it exactly. But in the larger perspective, the critical feature is really giving a clear separation between a low, high, and medium criticality. You need a rating that is really true to the actual attack. There's one other capability we are evaluating them for, and it's for custom alerts detection. A lot of these products are trying to profile the threats that are already out there in the industry. They're very well known and published. Today, there are targeted acts being played against organizations, so you have to be sensitive to how your firewalls, protocols, and your HTTP are all operating. You might have some fine-tuned threats that are targeting you, and you should be able to build custom defenses. They should have some openness in terms of how you specify your threats. You get a standard library of threats. On top of it, every organization builds its own.

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

"We switched because there were a lot of added features with Palo Alto that Check Point didn't have, and it was an upgrade for us."

"Has great threat detection capabilities."

"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."

"It is easy to use."

"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."

"One thing that I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, it is detecting all the suspicious or malicious binaries, and it has integration with Palo Alto Firewall."

"Technical support is the best in class, in my opinion, because they have invested heavily in research and development."

"The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"Easy to understand and easy to set up endpoint security solution. It's a multifeatured product with web content filtering and automated investigation features. It also has a fantastic vulnerability management dashboard."

"What I like most is the protection against phishing emails and anti-spam."

"The solution's latest features for threat analysis are updated to provide us with future protection against the latest threats worldwide."

"When it comes to the comprehensiveness of the threat protection from these products, so far I have seen how it's able to pick up the smallest script that is hidden in any type of malicious file."

"Defender should be fine for home use. It has all the basic functionality you need. I can't speak to how well it works as an enterprise solution because I'm not in the space."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has enabled us to secure devices even when they are off of the organization's premises and has helped improve and mitigate security risks across the organization."

"The solution has an easy-to-use interface, is always updated, and is user-friendly."

"Within its class I think, it has a high and decent detection rate."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pros

"They can provide you very contextual alerts on if something bad is happening—coming into your network or going out of your network. As part of that, they gather a lot of threat intelligence and map your connections against that. The larger benefit is that they give you a risk rating on their findings."

Cons

"The downsides of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks are that in many incidents, when I enter the causality chain, there are numerous logs."

"Managing the product should be easier."

"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."

"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."

"A little bit more automation would be nice."

"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."

"The only issues that we have are, one the cost, two the dashboard is not very intuitive, even though you can drill down within the dashboard, we usually have to gather information from other sources to determine locations and if its a false positive."

"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"Regarding the pricing of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, during the last three years, we set up the product and sold it, but we faced difficulties because Microsoft pricing is always the same."

"If a threat actor comes in, and creates a global administrative account, they can gain access to everything and whitelist then block everything else. Having everything, including Defender, under one brand is like having all of your eggs in one basket."

"It should support non-Windows products better. Microsoft is now one of the leading vendors in the security area. So, they should be product-independent."

"More integration with different platforms is an area for improvement for this product, and should be included in its next release."

"One thing that was lacking in Defender was web filtering. Its web filtering wasn't as comprehensive. Sophos was a little bit better than Defender for blocking URLs or installing programs."

"The second major area for improvement involves enhanced capabilities for different operating systems or platforms. That is, even though we have coverage for different operating systems or platforms such as Linux, we don't get all of the controls and enhanced capabilities that are available with Windows devices."

"We have had reports where users experience slowness on their PCs when files are being scanned regarding the stability and reliability of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint."

"It would be helpful if they offered video tutorial guides."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint cons

"My challenge is actually comparing offerings from different vendors across a threat spectrum that is very large. We are talking about millions of threats. How are you confident that Blue Hexagon is catching all one million of them and Palo Alto is doing the same thing? They all have their strengths. Within that, Blue Hexagon might cover 990,000 of them. Palo Alto might cover another 990,000. It's a bit difficult to compare them and say, "Oh, are they catching the same 990,000?" I don't know."

"My challenge is actually comparing offerings from different vendors across a threat spectrum that is very large."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."

"The price of the product is not very economical."

"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."

"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."

"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."

"Cortex XDR's pricing is ok."

"The tool's price is moderate."

"Very costly product."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"We are required to pay for the data we ingest, and increasing the data amount incurs additional expenses."

"We have seen ROI. Most of the other competing alternatives will cost up to around $30 per user device. We average 400 devices. Therefore, the amount that we save each year is 400 times $30."

"The pricing is competitive."

"This product is included in the pricing for Windows."

"Defender doesn't cost that much. When you use Microsoft technology, you can start with the free version and see how much the technology helps your organization solve security problems before you use the subscription. They also do this pay-as-you-go model, so you only pay when you use it."

"We mostly use Microsoft products. We use Office 365, and we use Azure. We're also a Microsoft partner. So, the licensing was much cheaper for us, and at the same time, a lot of the features that we were looking for were included in Defender."

"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can be costly as a standalone solution."

"The solution is free."

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint pricing and cost advice

"It's difficult to state the setup cost. All the NDRs range anywhere between $500,000, plus or minus, to $2 million. There's a spread of pricing here, depending on who you are talking to. Obviously the major brand names want more money. They typically bundle it with their other offerings. With Cisco, for example, you don't just buy an NDR. So, typically it gets rolled into the cost."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

912,818 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Outsourcing Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Construction Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Outsourcing Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	47
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	54

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	82
Midsize Enterprise	44
Large Enterprise	97

No data available

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 6% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

HP Wolf Security vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 3% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

Compared 2% of the time

More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Competitors

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 19% of the time

ExtraHop Reveal(x) vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 11% of the time

Darktrace vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 8% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 6% of the time

TrendAI Vision One vs Qualys Multi-Vector EDR

Compared 5% of the time

More Qualys Multi-Vector EDR Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

September 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

August 2026

Download Microsoft Defender for Endpoint product report

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

September 2026

Download Qualys Multi-Vector EDR 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

Blue Hexagon

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Palo Alto Networks

Microsoft

Demo not available

Qualys

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

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is designed for real-time threat detection and response, offering comprehensive visibility into potential security breaches across endpoints.

This solution integrates seamlessly with other Qualys modules, facilitating automated workflows that streamline incident management and enhance efficiency in monitoring and mitigating cyber threats. With features like real-time monitoring, detailed reporting, and proactive alerting, security teams can quickly identify and address vulnerabilities. While appreciated for its scalability and ease of deployment, users suggest improvements in integration, reporting, and configuration to further enhance its capabilities.

What are the key features of Qualys Multi-Vector EDR?

Real-time Threat Detection: Continuously monitors endpoints to detect potential threats immediately.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with other Qualys modules and existing systems for streamlined operations.
Automated Response: Automates incident response workflows to enhance efficiency and reduce manual tasks.
Detailed Reporting: Provides in-depth reports to support proactive security measures and quick remediation.
Scalability: Suitable for businesses of varying sizes due to its scalable architecture.

What are the benefits and ROI to look for when evaluating Qualys Multi-Vector EDR?

Enhanced Security: Comprehensive threat detection ensures robust security measures.
Improved Efficiency: Automated workflows save time and reduce manual intervention.
Quick Remediation: Real-time alerts and detailed reports facilitate swift vulnerability mitigation.
Cost-effective Deployment: Scalable and resource-efficient architecture suitable for businesses large and small.

Qualys Multi-Vector EDR is implemented across industries such as finance, healthcare, and retail, where real-time threat detection and automated response are critical. Its ability to integrate with existing systems and provide detailed reporting makes it a valuable asset for enhancing cybersecurity measures in diverse environments.

Qualys

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Petrofrac, Metro CSG, Christus Health

Pacific Dental Services, Greenhill and Co, Heffernan Insurance Brokers

Buyer's Guide

Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

September 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SentinelOne, CrowdStrike, Microsoft and others in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR). Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

912,818 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.

We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.