We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Malwarebytes based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us."
"Best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"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."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"The management capabilities, allow an IT organization to get quite a good picture of attempted cyber attacks."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"Traps has drastically reduced our endpoint attack surface via advanced detection capabilities, sandboxing of never before seen programs, and by drastically limiting where executables can launch in the first place."
"The solution has a good management interface."
"The product provides notifications for suspicious events. We have several public access points. The product helps to prevent unauthorized entry. Its most valuable features are pre-installation procedures and a cloud console. The console's interface is simple and can be viewed easily to take action. It covers everything in terms of security threats."
"It comprehensively finds and removes malicious software."
"Malwarebytes is a comprehensive solution for keeping endpoints safe and secure from intruders, viruses, malware and so on."
"The dashboard actually is good and it is simple."
"The technical support services are good."
"I like the solution's ability to detect potentially unwanted programs. For some reason, it seems superior to other solutions, or at least in comparison to McAfee."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to customize for different groups."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"The solution's installation from a central installation server could be improved because the engineers had a little bit of trouble getting it installed from a central location."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"It is not very strong in terms of endpoint management. It should have additional features like DLP, encryption, or advanced device control. Currently, Cortex is good in terms of the security of the endpoints, but it is not as good as other vendors in terms of the management of the endpoint."
"Being able to filter the events to see those that are related to the actual alert would save time spent by the engineer."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration."
"In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"We experience a lot of false positives."
"They should make it faster, less taxing on the processor."
"There is room for improvement in the way it is deployed, in terms of being able to distribute it. Right now we have to get our hands on a machine to deploy it. It would be nice if there was an easier system."
"We had a little performance problem with the solution, but that's been resolved. Since then, it's been running well."
"Notifications are lacking."
"Malwarebytes is not there in the reports from Gartner or IDC...If we look at the market trends and the industry, most customers look at Gartner's reports to identify whether a product is a leader, challenger, or a big product, depending on which they choose."
"The online reporting needs to be improved. Currently, we have to look at it online, and if we want to download a report, it just downloads as an Excel file. It's just raw information. There needs to be some way to better display it when it's downloaded."
"A solution must be installed in the main gateway to give an overview of the incoming and outgoing traffic. The technical support team's response time should be faster."
More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 4th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 80 reviews while Malwarebytes is ranked 18th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 35 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Malwarebytes is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks writes "Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Malwarebytes writes "Intuitive, easy to use, and does a good job of catching and stopping things for the most part and has a unique rollback feature". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Darktrace, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas Malwarebytes is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, HP Wolf Security, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Malwarebytes 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.