Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Secure Endpoint (formerly Cisco Advanced Malware Protection [AMP] for Endpoints) offers cloud-delivered next-generation antivirus, endpoint protection platform (EPP), and advanced endpoint detection and response (EDR).N/A
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Traps replaces traditional antivirus with multi-method prevention, a proprietary combination of malware and exploit prevention methods that protect users and endpoints from known and unknown threats.N/A
Pricing
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Endpoint Security
Comparison of Endpoint Security features of Product A and Product B
Cisco Secure Endpoint
7.7
23 Ratings
10% below category average
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
-
Ratings
Anti-Exploit Technology7.723 Ratings00 Ratings
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)7.823 Ratings00 Ratings
Centralized Management6.023 Ratings00 Ratings
Hybrid Deployment Support8.55 Ratings00 Ratings
Infection Remediation7.323 Ratings00 Ratings
Vulnerability Management7.822 Ratings00 Ratings
Malware Detection9.023 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Small Businesses
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management
Score 8.7 out of 10
SentinelOne Singularity
SentinelOne Singularity
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
8.4
(25 ratings)
8.8
(12 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
4.5
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
6.9
(20 ratings)
2.0
(1 ratings)
Availability
7.3
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(24 ratings)
10.0
(3 ratings)
Implementation Rating
4.5
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Cisco Secure EndpointPalo Alto Networks Cortex XDR
Likelihood to Recommend
Cisco
Cisco Secure Endpoint is well suited for keeping track of the many different and points that we have in our organization. All of these devices can easily be monitored with Cisco Secure Endpoint. It can monitor our servers and our desktops and laptops in our environment. It isn’t as appropriate for our student devices. However, those aren’t as critical since they are just Chromebooks.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Malware that doesn’t leave files behind has become widely available. Anyone who can afford to reverse this trend should purchase technology. Application whitelisting isn’t for everyone, and Palo Alto Networks Traps can help. Enterprises looking for a low-affected, next-generation solution with high protection should consider it. PAN Traps is a great product at a reasonable price, and I highly recommend it.
Read full review
Pros
Cisco
  • Once we, I guess one turned out that path because we have a small IT team, one of the big factors that came into play is how easy it was to deploy and the kind of security it provides for your endpoint devices. For us, it's got all those AI capabilities that really help. So traditionally when there was an incident on Alert on an antivirus program, you'd have a couple of guys run across the office to try to pull a plug. One of the awesome features with Secure Endpoint is its isolation mode that clamps down endpoint devices and then just isolate it. It's connected to, I think Cisco's tell us the threat intel environment. So they've got up-to-date metrics and fixes on threats out in the wild. And once they detect that, they apply it across your whole brand. So yeah, really effective for us.
  • One of the things that really stands out is the retrospective detections. So say something's detected two weeks later of a product that you had on your system. Initially it scanned it past, but then they discover vulnerability. The product has the ability to come back and retrospectively apply restrictions on specific applications you have on your environment. So I think that's one key winner.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Direct Access to devices via Live Terminal which provides operations with scripting, triage, and preservation of artifacts.
  • Behavioral Indicators of Compromise which provides alerts on events regarding groups of hosts and their signatures.
  • Querying complex data sets involving a variety of devices for network connections, hashes, DNS, etc.
Read full review
Cons
Cisco
  • The interface has many views that all look the same, except that functionalities are different. This makes it incredibly difficult to find the action you want to take.
  • Built-in exclusion sets are missing a number of notable Anti-Malware products and must be manually implemented.
  • High learning curve due to complexity of the solution and the range of features it contains. Provided documentation is hidden in a small icon at the top of the page which is often off-screen when needed.
  • Color choices lead to panic situations during deployment. 1 questionable file could lead to the main display showing a large, bright red alert which makes customers think their whole environment is compromised.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • Traps doesn't seem to function as a traditional A/V very well, so it's better as another layer to your endpoint protection
  • Traps can cause issues with some legacy or custom programs, so exceptions may have to be made
  • Traps falsely identifies things as malicious at times, this is not often though
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Cisco
the renewal must be studied with different factors
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Usability
Cisco
AMP is very difficult to use compared to other products we've seen. It's hard to understand why there are so many different logins for the various products that supposedly integrate with AMP. We had weekly phone calls for months to implement the product yet none of the IT department really enjoys using this product or feels comfortable with the accuracy of detections. The number of false positives is high.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Day to day, Cortex is easy to use when you have no alerts and when an agent upgrade doesn't go south. Alerts are far too "clicky", there's too many steps to drilling down to what actually happened to trigger an alert. Investigating alerts in Cortex takes about 5x longer than it should.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Cisco
no complain and no issue with availability
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Cisco
In terms of technical support for Cisco Secure Endpoint, the support has been pretty good. All the cases I submitted were solved in a reasonable time frame, and it was a good experience. However, I find that not as many vendors have the expertise I would expect.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
The support we receive from Palo Alto is one of the best aspects of Traps. It is very easy to recommend their support. It seems much easier to connect directly with someone with a deep understanding of the product rather than other companies where you basically have to make an airtight case that it is some kind of non-standard issue that can't be solved with existing documentation. Palo Alto digs deep and helps with advanced troubleshooting to get things working.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Cisco
no participation in implementation
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Cisco
Cisco Secure Endpoint is an advanced EDR solution that is highly effective and scalable. Our experience previously with MalwareBytes and Microsoft Defender was not horrible, but these products were not as effective and did not integrate well with our other security products to allow us to monitor and react quickly to address threats that were within our network. Key to any security effort is mitigation and the ability to quickly identify and respond so any damage can be avoided or limited.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
Traps is the slickest interface, easy to use and intuitive rule making, and the rest just didn't quite stack up to the performance level of Traps. McAfee and Kaspersky just hog processor and RAM power. I didn't like the interface and functionality of SentinelOne as much as Traps. Palo Alto really put a lot of time into the development of this software, and had some of the founding fathers of IT Security heading the development process. Can't beat that.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Cisco
  • AMP has been able to catch some serious infections and stop them from doing huge damage in our environment.
  • The overall cost of AMP vs the cost of not having this protection and getting hit with malware, or other nefarious damage to your environment is well worth the money.
Read full review
Palo Alto Networks
  • After putting Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR on a user's system, users came back with a positive response that there are no performance issues now.
  • We are able to track and control granular suspicious and malicious activities.
  • Web controls are missing, which if they would have been there would have been very helpful.
Read full review
ScreenShots