We performed a comparison between Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Panda Adaptive Defense 360 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."Impressive detection capabilities"
"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."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"If there are multiple alerts, the app will automatically create and rate an event instead of going through each one."
"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"It'll not slow down your system when compared to others."
"It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application."
"Their XDR agent and their behavioral indicators of compromise (BIOC) are pretty nice. Their managed threat hunting is also pretty nice. They also have WildFire, which is a service for actively looking for malware. It's quite useful."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is we don't have to have dedicated infrastructure on-premise because it is cloud-based."
"The patch management module is very important."
"The interface is great."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
"The feature I find most valuable is the advance search engine."
"Their remote management (RMM) is very good."
"It is stable, and the performance is good."
"Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"There's room for improvement in the quick response time and technical support for integration issues, especially when dealing with multiple vendors."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"Intelligence aspects need improvement"
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"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."
"Everything with Fortinet having to do with their cloud services. They need to invest more in their internal infrastructure that they are running in the cloud. One of the things I find with their cloud environment compared to others' is that they go cheap on the equipment. So it causes some performance degradation."
"There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly."
"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."
"Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"In reporting they should have a customizable dashboard due to the fact that C-level people don't like reporting to the IT department. They prefer to have a real-time dashboard. That kind of dashboard needs to have various customizations."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"It would be nice if Panda Security Adaptive Defense could come out with remote desktop usage."
"Needs a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether it's valid."
"They need to expand their offering of add-ons to enhance capabilities further."
"Panda Security Adaptive Defense’s stability could be improved."
"Their MacOS support isn't that good."
"For some urgent updates, I don't like the need for the tool to be frequently restarted."
"The stability could be improved. My teammates who use Panda Security and I have experienced some issues."
"The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe."
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 Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 26 reviews. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is rated 8.2. 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 Panda Adaptive Defense 360 writes "Managing multiple machines is a pain, but support is top notch". Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Darktrace, CrowdStrike Falcon, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security, whereas Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, ESET Endpoint Protection Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and WatchGuard EPDR. See our Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Panda Adaptive Defense 360 report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.