Automox vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Automox and OpenText are both solutions in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category. Automox is ranked #23 with an average rating of 8.6, while OpenText is ranked #32. Automox holds a 0.5% mindshare in EPP, compared to OpenText’s 1.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Automox users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and Automox are key players in the endpoint security market. Automox has the upper hand due to its comprehensive automated patch management and ease of deployment, and it offers more advantageous pricing.

Features: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers traffic security monitoring, endpoint security, and cloud-based detection for quicker threat response. It is lightweight, providing protection without hampering system performance. Automox features a cloud-based platform, automated patch management, and cross-platform compatibility. It simplifies endpoint management through a centralized console and supports diverse environments with effective policy management.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Core Endpoint Protection requires enhancements in threat prevention, including stronger defenses against ransomware and phishing, and improved reporting with detailed documentation. Automox could benefit from better handling of multi-tenant environments, simpler policy management for multiple clients, and more robust remote support for Linux and iOS. Users also note the need for an offline mode and better notification controls.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products perform well in cloud environments. However, OpenText users report delays with support response times. Automox users generally experience effective customer service and gain additional assistance from its active community despite occasional response delays.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText is seen as affordable and offers multi-year licenses, providing good value for basic protection. Automox is praised for its cost-effectiveness and flexible pricing, frequently cited as more affordable than competitors. It offers substantial ROI through time and cost savings in endpoint management, bundling multiple features into one platform.

To learn more, read our detailed Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 peers since 2012

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...

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is 1.9%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks	3.8%
Automox	0.5%
OpenText Core Endpoint Protection	1.9%
Other	93.8%

Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)

Featured Reviews

ABHISHEK_SINGH

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.

Read full review

Naqash Ahmed

Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford

Automation has saved time and improves secure, centralized patching across all our devices

While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement. I want the custom reports to be even more detailed, specifically where I can add more details. It would be nice to have more filters in reports based on location and department more easily. Secondly, the notifications could be more customizable. Many times notifications come, but we don't have control over which notification is urgent and which is not. For example, if there's an alert of a critical update or pending approval, it can help me focus better. An alert of a security threat could be another type of notification that tells me something is important. Customized notifications would be much better. I would say the user interface could be improved as well. Some parts of the dashboard are a bit hard to understand. If they could be improved to be more intuitive, for example, if it could be easy to navigate between devices and reports, that would be great. I would say if Automox could also provide automation templates, that would help. I know there are templates, but I want more templates. Having ready-made worklets for common tasks can save a lot of time. Lastly, it should also support the interface for mobile screens.

Read full review

reviewer2584380

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,…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."

"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 scalability of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very good."

"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has accelerated the response time for my security team, so we have been able to resolve issues faster than usual."

"Based on my experience, I would recommend Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to other people."

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."

"Has great threat detection capabilities."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pros

"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational."

"Among the most valuable features are its ease of use and the Worklets. Both of them are time-savers. Worklets enable us to customize things for a given environment. It's something like when Apple lets other people create applications. Other peoples' Worklets can be used in our environment and in our customers' environments. That saves a lot of time, and it's really cool."

"It's super easy to use and we haven't found anything easier."

"Automox provides complete visibility for any laptop, desktop or server in our environment, regardless of whether the person is on the train, in the cloud or on the move."

"Automox has eased our operations; it is very simple to use and does not have heavy workflows."

"Its flexibility is most valuable."

"Literally, it's our go-to product for patching and we don't use anything else."

"The best features that Automox offers are its automation, as the scheduling is super easy to set up, policies are easy to configure, and the software discoverability."

More Automox pros

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is very scalable."

"It is excellent endpoint protection for mobiles that does everything it says it will."

"They have a lot of features integrated from way back, which shows that the product developers know exactly what they're doing."

"Working as part of our security stack, it has protected us from countless attacks."

"Low performance requirements."

"It is very lightweight on the workstations, not slowing them down while still doing its job very well."

"We've not had any issues with scalability. If an organization needs to expand, they can do so quite easily."

"Customer Service: Top-of-the-line; the busy community as well. Technical Support: Top-of-the-line; the busy community as well."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pros

Cons

"The negative aspect I see is the economic model used by Palo Alto."

"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."

"It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously."

"For working with the solution, you only really need a web browser, however, we've found that working on Chrome, for example, is horrible."

"The onboarding process could be better."

"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."

"I have faced some issues with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks; there is room for improvement in the sense that certain options prevent us from seeing and segregating data."

"The product's pricing could be better."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks cons

"I would add that remote support for iOS could be better, and remote support of Linux is also lacking."

"They need to improve the automation features."

"The biggest area they need to fix, without a doubt, is the ability to copy and sync profiles and worklets between all of the organizations you manage, and the ability to have top-level user access control across all of the companies that you manage."

"When we bring on a new client, we need to go into that client and manually set up my account, my chief engineer's account, three technicians' accounts, and a billing person's account all over again, which is annoying. We have probably up to 15 or 16 of our clients on Automox now. For every single one of those, we have had to go in and set this up. Then, if anything changes, we have to remember to go to Automox and change it 15 or 16 times. So, we just want inheritable permissions, and that is it. We have talked to them about this, and they are like, "Yeah, we hear a lot of complaints about it." I am thinking, "Guys, I have been complaining about this for a year and a half. When are you going to do it?" It must be some tricky thing or not an easy fix, because I can only assume if it were easy, then they would have done it by now."

"From an enterprise perspective, Automox could have better compliance reporting, which is needed for audit readiness, security reviews, and customer compliance evidence."

"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository. Currently, all updates are provided directly from the internet. So, if you have 1,000 devices, all 1,000 devices go directly out to the internet. We would love the option of being able to put the updates on local storage so that we're not consuming as much bandwidth. That is literally the only thing that we've ever wanted."

"While Automox has very good features, I think there's still room for improvement."

"Asset management would be a great feature to add to Automox. We would run easier scripts or more out of the box scripts that would help us in audits. \"

More Automox cons

"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."

"I did notice that my OS slowed down, but I don't know if that's due to Webroot."

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection needs to focus on how they can widen their area of scope by not just being an antivirus tool anymore. The shortcoming in the customization area of the tool needs improvement."

"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."

"The solution could improve by providing better ransomware protection."

"Unified threat management (UTM) integration."

"Reporting system could be improved."

"I believe that Webroot Business Endpoint Protection should offer a more modern UI."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."

"The tool's price is moderate."

"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."

"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."

"The price of the product is not very economical."

"This is an expensive solution."

"It has reasonable pricing for the use cases it provides to the company."

"I feel it is fairly priced."

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks pricing and cost advice

"Automox just charges us a set amount per user, per month, for using the product. That is very important to us. Because it's a cloud-native solution, you're saving on the cost of hosting an on-premises solution on your servers."

"We are on the premium licensing, which is the one that has the API capability that we use."

"Its licensing for a year was nine grand. There was no additional fee."

"The cost is very reasonable compared to the competition."

"The product is a great value."

"There are no additional costs in addition to the extended licensing fees with Automox. You get your support and your per endpoint license with what you purchased."

"We're doing it annually directly through Automox. It is per endpoint. It is $2 and some change per endpoint, but I believe the cost is right around $28,000. Everything is covered in this fee."

"For all these software tools, it is usually a subscription model. There is a monthly charge that we need to pass along to our clients because we are doing all this for their benefit. It is only a couple of bucks a month per computer, and that is a low enough price point where our clients, without exception, have accepted it, and said, "This is great. We will pay that. It sounds like a worthwhile thing.""

More Automox pricing and cost advice

"Webroot Business Endpoint Protection is not too expensive. My licenses cost me between $300 and $400. It is really good price wise."

"With Webroot Business Endpoint Protection, I can select a yearly billing cycle."

"Its cost is not much per month. Our price is a couple of bucks a user."

"The solution doesn't cost too much. It's about 30 Euros a year for each endpoint. It's pretty affordable for us and for many other companies."

"Our strategy was to overestimate the complexity and cost. It turned out that Webroot's assurance was justified."

"If you purchase for clients, then you are the managing billing entity. It's better to either get a monthly subscription check from your clients, or to prepay for the year (so as to not keep cash in reserve to pay the bill each month) IMHO."

"We are on an annual subscription for the use of Webroot Business Endpoint Protection."

"I think the price is fairly reasonable. I was really prepared to pay more, but the price is fine."

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Comms Service Provider

14%

Outsourcing Company

12%

Construction Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

11%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	50
Midsize Enterprise	21
Large Enterprise	57

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	35
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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. ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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,...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automox?

I did not have too much information on the pricing side of things since I was not responsible for administering cost ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Automox?

I think Automox can be improved by including a few more software titles that are very important in their third-party ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Automox?

My main use case for Automox is because I work for a managed service provider, so I set patching schedules for our cl...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 16% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 4% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

Cortex XSIAM vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

Compared 3% of the time

More Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks Competitors

NinjaOne vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

Tanium vs Automox

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Configuration Manager vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

BigFix vs Automox

Compared 6% of the time

Rapid7 Metasploit vs Automox

Compared 5% of the time

More Automox Competitors

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 47% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 5% of the time

SentinelOne Singularity Endpoint vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 4% of the time

Huntress Managed EDR vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 3% of the time

HP Wolf Security vs OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Compared 1% of the time

More OpenText Core Endpoint Protection Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks

November 2026

Download Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks product report

Buyer's Guide

Automox

November 2026

Download Automox product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

October 2026

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection report

Download OpenText Core Endpoint Protection product report

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps

No data available

Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection

Overview

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks provides advanced threat detection with AI-driven endpoint protection and seamless integration, ensuring multi-layered security and automatic threat response.

Cortex XDR is designed to safeguard endpoints against malware and suspicious activities. It offers advanced threat detection and response capabilities using behavioral analysis, AI, and machine learning. It seamlessly integrates with security infrastructures, providing endpoint security, firewall integration, and enhanced visibility in both cloud-based and on-premises environments.

What are the key features of Cortex XDR?

Advanced Threat Detection: Uses AI and machine learning for proactive threat identification.
Multi-layered Security: Combines various security measures for comprehensive protection.
Endpoint Protection: Safeguards against malware and exploits.
Behavioral Analysis: Monitors suspicious activity for early detection.
Automatic Threat Response: Automates responses to neutralize threats.

What benefits should users expect?

Ease of Use: Simplifies security management with intuitive design.
Resource Efficiency: Minimizes impact on system resources.
Integration Capabilities: Works well with existing security setups.
Reduced Analyst Workload: Automates processes to decrease manual intervention.

Organizations in diverse sectors deploy Cortex XDR to protect against malware, leveraging its advanced threat detection capabilities. Its integration with existing security infrastructures appeals to those seeking comprehensive protection in both cloud and on-premises environments, providing enhanced visibility and threat intelligence.

Palo Alto Networks

Automox offers automated patch management with cloud-native architecture, cross-platform compatibility, and ease of use. It provides real-time visibility and streamlines operations across Windows, macOS, and Linux, making it ideal for complex IT environments.

Automox empowers organizations with features like Worklets and remote management, enhancing security and efficiency through customizable patching policies, PowerShell script execution, and detailed reporting. It's primarily used for automated patch management, patch remediation, and compliance maintenance across diverse systems, ensuring cybersecurity and reducing vulnerabilities. Enhancements are desired for user access control, policy synchronization, and integration with tools like Tenable. Support for offline patching, rollback features, enhanced reporting, and notification customization are in demand. Improvements in cost effectiveness and multi-group policy applications are also suggested.

What are the key features of Automox?

Automated Patching: Streamlines updates across operating systems.
Cloud-Native Architecture: Offers real-time visibility and ease of use.
Cross-Platform Compatibility: Supports Windows, macOS, and Linux.
Worklets: Custom scripts for automating tasks.
Remote Management: Manage devices from anywhere.
Custom Patching Policies: Tailor updates for specific needs.
Insights Reporting: Generate detailed reports to enhance efficiency.

What benefits and ROI can users expect when evaluating Automox?

Time Efficiency: Saves time by automating complex tasks.
Increased Security: Enhances security through effective patch management.
Compliance: Maintains cybersecurity compliance.
Network Visibility: Provides comprehensive device network oversight.
Scalable Management: Handles extensive network updates effectively.

In industry applications, Automox is widely used for managing and updating vast fleets of devices, particularly in sectors requiring stringent cybersecurity measures. It ensures seamless operations through its centralized automation and management capabilities, making it essential for organizations handling extensive IT networks.

Automox

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection offers cloud-managed endpoint security with AI integration, providing real-time protection and lightweight performance. It ensures low system impact, seamless cloud integration, and cost-effective security solutions for various devices.

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection is a comprehensive endpoint security platform utilized by managed-service providers for antivirus and firewall functionality across servers, workstations, and mobile devices. It employs AI for robust threat detection, integrating with cloud applications for real-time updates. Multi-layered security features include malware protection, network defense, and DNS protection. Although connectivity and threat reporting need improvement, this platform extensively supports remote device management and integrates efficiently with Active Directory policies.

What are the key features of OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Cloud Management: Centralized admin console for easy oversight
AI Integration: Enhanced threat detection capabilities
Lightweight Performance: Minimal impact on system resources
Real-time Threat Database: Constant updates for effective protection
Web Control Interface: Monitors and controls web traffic

What benefits are associated with OpenText Core Endpoint Protection?

Ease of Setup and Maintenance: Facilitates quick deployment and upkeep
Seamless Cloud Integration: Simplifies scalability and operation
Cost-Effectiveness: Affordable pricing with comprehensive features
Mobile Security Capabilities: Supports remote device management

OpenText Core Endpoint Protection finds application in industries requiring stringent data protection and peace of mind over device security. Managed-service providers implement this for comprehensive antivirus and firewall features, safeguarding multi-device networks. It is particularly useful for DNS protection and integrating with Active Directory policies, enabling secure yet flexible operations across sectors.

OpenText

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank

Information Not Available

Mytech Partners

Buyer's Guide

Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

September 2026

Free Report: Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection

Find out what your peers are saying about Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Automox vs. OpenText Core Endpoint Protection 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.