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

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ vs WatchGuard EPDR comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
OpenText Core Endpoint Prot...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
35th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
31
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) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ is 1.7%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard EPDR is 1.5%, 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 Networks3.9%
WatchGuard EPDR1.5%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​1.7%
Other92.9%
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.
reviewer2584380 - PeerSpot reviewer
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,…
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 solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"The product is very good, it has caught a lot of exploits that most products would not."
"The dashboard is customizable."
"Technical support is the best in class, in my opinion, because they have invested heavily in research and development."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"When the pandemic started, Palo Alto came up with many solutions, which helped with the quick shift from on-premises to the cloud."
"I like the centralized console and the predictive analysis it does of malware. It is very stable and also scalable."
"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."
"Overall, the solution is stable."
"My advice about this product is that it is a very good solution and offers a stable and trusted software that runs smoothly and is easy to deploy."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It took five minutes. I installed the solution myself."
"I like that Webroot is very lightweight. It didn't bog down the machine, and more importantly, it had heuristics artificial intelligence to some degree. It wasn't like full-blown artificial intelligence, but something where you have one endpoint recognizing issues because it maintains a cloud database. If one client recognizes a threat, it would add it to the database, and almost immediately, every agent in the world would also know about that threat. That was very appealing to us. However, now it's becoming commonplace, whereas ventures like Symantec and McAfee were based more on the traditional model of definition and updates, and we were always falling behind. Webroot also has pretty good technical support."
"Their policy management, their cloud-based dashboard and user interface are very easy to navigate."
"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."
"It is an easy-to-use and easy-to-configure product."
"Valuable features include good scanning, very light footprint and management console that the client can access and (just as important) in which I can see status of groups of computers (I am a consultant, IT role)."
"Technical support has always been top-notch when you can get through."
"It's very easy to deploy, we don't have any problem or issues. It's most full automatic. It basically takes the assumption that everything is supposed to be a suspect; files, processes, URL accesses, and so on."
"We are very satisfied with the product."
"Reduced the number of malware/virus issue encounters and dashboard alerts providing better visibility."
"I think there's quite a good balance in everything with WatchGuard EPDR, with tools to do things and watch what's happening, and everything is in the same tools and quite well designed or thought about how to do things, which is the reason I've been enjoying them."
"The solution itself is great."
"What I appreciate the most about WatchGuard EPDR is that with the managed detection and response system, when there is an alert about the product running, the turnaround time for enabling it is less than two hours."
"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."
 

Cons

"In terms of areas of improvement, we have not completed our review of the product. We're also looking at other products. So, it's a little bit hard to tell what could be different because we have not completed the review of this product, but based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"Fine-tuning the detection policy requires experience because the policy is very complex in Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and we get high false positive alerts."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."
"The downside to the solution is that there are a large number of false positives."
"The solution can never really be an on-premises solution based simply on the way it is set up. It needs metadata to run and improve. Having an on-premises solution would cut it off from making improvements."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"Tech support needs to be improved. If we have an issue, and we don't have an issue very often, trying to get support's attention is a really difficult endeavor."
"The console spins up relatively slowly, and some of the configuration items are obscure (e.g., reporting back one time per day is a default setting) and need to be tweaked."
"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."
"An updated UI would be nice, but is not hardly used."
"One of the biggest pain points is that it's not really ransomware-oriented. They will be able to catch some, but that's where Sentinel One is a better player compared to Webroot."
"It would be nice if it had a feature for automatically generating reports on the client end for device status, security status and backup information."
"Usually, when it comes to reliability, McAfee and Norton are at 99 percent. Webroot's percentage is lower. It is 94% reliable in terms of what it catches, but you're trading that percentage for customer satisfaction because your computer isn't being constantly told that it just blocked something, or it just did something."
"There should be a Webroot Business Endpoint Protection mobile app."
"The implementation was difficult."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense is stable. However, when updates are being done on the computers we can experience some troubles because the computers need to be restarted. When we start the computers they are not functioning correctly and we have not received proper feedback regarding this random issue."
"The product is available at a very high price, making it an area where improvements are required."
"An area for improvement would be the software deployment to seamlessly deploy software packages across multiple machines simultaneously, and to enhance the remote monitoring capabilities."
"Needs a service desk system to link up with endpoint protection and email protection."
"For some urgent updates, I don't like the need for the tool to be frequently restarted."
"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."
"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

"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"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."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"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."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"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."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"Get a trial, then a multi-year license."
"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."
"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."
"The solution is very cost-effective."
"It is relatively cheap."
"The solution is pretty cheap, actually. At our level, which is at 2,500 endpoints, we're paying 87 cents an agent per month."
"The pricing is high."
"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"The price is excellent."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"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."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"The licensing is subscription-based and priced well compared to other endpoint security solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business35
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
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 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...
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...
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...
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
Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mytech Partners
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 OpenText Core Endpoint Protection​ vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,948 professionals have used our research since 2012.