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

ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform vs Uptycs comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 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
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (6th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
6th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (4th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
Uptycs
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
65th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (55th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (65th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (34th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (45th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (45th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (23rd), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Uptycs is 0.4%, up from 0.1% 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 Networks3.7%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
Uptycs0.4%
Other94.6%
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.
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.
SangramGupta - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at Deloitte USI
Centralized visibility has improved risk-based vulnerability management but onboarding still needs simplification
From my perspective, the features of Uptycs that stand out more for my projects and organization are the vulnerability management, endpoint visibility, and asset inventory management features. I can share two specific outcomes that show this positive impact using Uptycs. First, it reduces significant time and effort from the asset inventory point of view because previously I needed to scan all of the assets which were in scope, but now I only scan those assets that are currently active and in scope, and the CMDB and asset inventory receive proper updates of those assets. Secondly, in vulnerability prioritization, I receive all the prioritized vulnerabilities so I can prioritize and mitigate or remediate them as soon as possible, which reduces the overall time of remediation as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Palo Alto Networks Traps improves our security posture and lowers risk by providing next-gen methods to combat against modern threats on all the major platforms."
"WildFire AI is the best option for this product."
"The tool is designed to scale for large enterprises and handle large volumes of data."
"The dashboard is customizable."
"I can highlight that we have not faced any security incidents with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and even though our environment is quite dynamic, we have not faced any security incident with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks until now."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"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."
"Overall, ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has significantly strengthened our endpoint security by enforcing zero trust principles while maintaining operational flexibility and user productivity."
"Overall, everything is excellent, and everything is well-prepared, from the laptops provided to the overall setup."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits our company because we can be secure while remaining relaxed, as we are only expecting normal behavior and nothing unusual."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs and expenses."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs or expenses because it allows our techs to be much more efficient."
"Overall, I would rate ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform a ten out of ten."
"My impression of the allowlisting feature in ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that it is awesome."
"They have multiple great features."
"I have seen a return on investment from using Uptycs, saving almost 25 to 30 percent in terms of asset investigations or asset inventory management and vulnerability prioritization, which is significant."
 

Cons

"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."
"Limited remote connection."
"There are some limitations on the Traps agents."
"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."
"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"The onboarding process could be better."
"One thing that was missing was the integration part. Currently, they don't have out-of-box integration with IBM QRadar, or if they have the integration, the integration doesn't work well."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"ThreatLocker would benefit from incorporating an antivirus feature or comprehensive 24-hour log monitoring, a valuable enhancement for both business and enterprise-level users."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
"Something we have come up against a couple of times is that we have two clients that are software developers. They create software that doesn't have digital signatures and that's not easy to categorize or whitelist with ThreatLocker. We have to go in and make custom rules to allow them to do their work and to be protected from malicious threats."
"We identified several areas that we would like to see improved."
"Scalability is challenging, not due to the platform. Scaling ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform usage requires dedicated resources for maintenance."
"The portal can be a little overwhelming at times from an administration point of view. It displays a lot of information, and it's all useful. However, sometimes there is too much on the screen to sift through, especially if you're trying to diagnose a client's problem with a piece of software. Maybe something has stopped working since they updated it, and we need to see if ThreatLocker is blocking a component of that software."
"Identifying areas of improvement is challenging, however, perhaps adding a few more built-ins could help."
"I was discussing with someone the other day, and it seems there is currently no solution for mobile users."
"Regarding improvements for Uptycs, I suggest simplified onboarding for complex cloud environments because the current onboarding method is complex and requires checks with the support team."
"We end up facing a lot of issues after upgrades."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Our customers have expressed that the price is high."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"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."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"Considering what this product does, ThreatLocker is very well-priced, if not too nicely priced for the customer."
"Its price is fair. They have added some additional things to it beyond allowlisting. They are up-charging for them, but in terms of the value we get and the way it impacts us, we get a bang for our buck with ThreatLocker than a lot of our other security tools."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"So far, it has been great. I have no complaints. Of course, everybody wishes it was cheaper."
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business52
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise11
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. ...
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 ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is goo...
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform can be improved by providing admin rights that allow us to manag...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform is to secure the server.A specific example ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Comcast, Crossbeam, Flexport, Greenlight Financial, Lookout Security, PayNearMe
Find out what your peers are saying about CrowdStrike, Microsoft, SentinelOne and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: May 2026.
899,258 professionals have used our research since 2012.