Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Automox vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
4.9
Cortex XDR reduces security incidents, personnel needs, and costs, offering quick ROI, enhanced performance, and competitive pricing.
Sentiment score
7.4
Automox enhances efficiency in patch management, saving time and resources, improving compliance, and offering better visibility and security.
Sentiment score
6.5
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform reduces costs, boosts IT efficiency, enhances security, and increases revenue through service reselling and protection.
They appreciate the rich telemetry data from the solution, as it provides in-depth threat identification.
Cyber Security Manager at Welab bank
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks helps to reduce my total cost of ownership significantly.
Detection and Response Consultant at Inovasys
In Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, most of the remediation is automated and the accuracy is quite good.
Network Security Engineer at Cyberwell Solution
It is a cloud-based solution, so you do not need on-premises infrastructure, which saves hardware.
Project Manager at Shell
It has also been a great tool because we are able to reduce both manual labor and operational expenses by automating patching of roughly 200 Windows servers.
Data at Infosys
Offered an additional remote solution, all while saving a lot of time and cost through troubleshooting.
Project Engineer at Unilever
If something were to happen without ThreatLocker, the cost would be huge, and thus, having it is definitely worth it.
Tier 1 IT Engineer at a retailer with 11-50 employees
Based on what we use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform for with the same functionalities and packaging, it was around 13 or 14 hours.
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
We have the MDR package as well, and just knowing someone is watching those endpoints at 3:00 a.m. is a lifesaver that you cannot put a dollar figure on.
System Administrator at Gwynedd Mercy University
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Cortex XDR support is effective and fast but faces issues with language, delays, and high costs, yet generally satisfactory.
Sentiment score
7.5
Automox’s customer service is highly praised for responsiveness, expertise, and efficiency, surpassing larger companies in user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
8.0
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers 24/7 top-tier support with rapid, knowledgeable assistance, direct real agent access, and seamless escalation.
The technical support from Palo Alto deserves a mark of ten because they reach out within an hour whenever assistance is needed.
Head of data centers at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees
There is no back and forth, and they know what we are asking for and come up with the best resolution for a solution.
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
If any of these services are missed, it becomes a problem in terms of support tickets, follow-up, or special configuration that needs to be done in the system.
Chief of IT Architecture at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
They are really good because they don't take five days to get back to me; they respond within 24 hours with really good information.
Network & Security Administrator at a legal firm with 51-200 employees
They're very knowledgeable and have given us many channels for support, including email, chat, and documentation.
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
The customer support has been excellent as the support team is always responsive and proactive.
Quality Assurance Manager at Unilever
They have been very responsive, helpful, and knowledgeable.
Systems Security Analyst & Deputy Security Officer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
I would rate their customer support a ten out of ten.
Director, Managed Services at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Their support is world-class.
Supervisor, Client Security at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Cortex XDR is scalable, supports diverse enterprises, integrates with endpoints, and enables easy expansion with cloud infrastructure.
Sentiment score
7.6
Automox is highly scalable and cloud-based, effectively managing numerous devices, despite minor manageability and console load time issues.
Sentiment score
7.8
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is scalable, user-friendly, and efficiently accommodates small to Fortune 500 companies with seamless integration.
You can onboard 10,000 endpoints in just hours, which demonstrates the excellent scalability of this product.
Assistant Security Architect at Cloudnomics
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks can be expanded anytime by purchasing another license without any issues related to scalability.
Head of data centers at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees
I think scalability for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is good.
Threat Analyst II at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
It's pretty easy to scale because it's SaaS, and adding more devices doesn't require any extra server or anything similar.
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
Automox scalability is excellent because it caters to my organization needs and can handle our organizational needs, ensuring that all our devices are well patched.
Project Manager at Shell
Automox's scalability is excellent as it has continued to grow with my organization and caters to my organization's needs.
Project Engineer at Unilever
I started off with just the servers, and within a month and a half, I set up the entire company with ThreatLocker.
Technical Engineer at Cloud 1 Solutions
It seems to primarily operate on the endpoints rather than at a central location pushing out policies.
Systems Security Analyst & Deputy Security Officer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform scales very smoothly with our growing needs.
CEO at Mostro
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Cortex XDR is highly regarded for stability, reliable performance, and well-received updates, despite minor occasional disruptions.
Sentiment score
7.7
Automox is praised for its stability, reliable performance, prompt incident response, and efficient patching, with minimal downtime.
Sentiment score
7.7
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is praised for stability and support, with minor issues primarily during initial policy tuning.
Cortex remains fast and responsive, even with increasing data and alerts.
Final Year Student at Gitam University
The thresholds we've seen on our firewall boxes at some instances reached 80% to 85%, but even at that level of utilization, we don't observe any latency or any issues reported with respect to accessing the application.
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance.
Cyber Security Manager at Welab bank
It's not crashing or experiencing any downtime.
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
I have not experienced any lagging or downtime
Quality Assurance Manager at Unilever
I can confirm that Automox is very stable.
Project Manager at Shell
For five years, we have not had a problem.
Supervisor, Client Security at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Once deployed, it downloads the policies locally, so even if the computer doesn't have internet, it doesn't matter.
Information Cybersecurity Technology Specialist at Freez.it
It has been very stable, reliable, and accessible.
COO at Panda Technology
 

Room For Improvement

Cortex XDR requires enhancements in UI, integration, reporting, and pricing, while addressing false positives and improving automation and mobile support.
Automox needs better sync, user access, automation, UI, bandwidth management, notifications, reports, and remote support for Linux/iOS.
Improving identity management, integration, compatibility, UI, network control, and training will enhance ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform's usability and efficiency.
Improving reporting and dashboard customization, along with the addition of real-time and exportable reports, would help SOC teams greatly.
Final Year Student at Gitam University
The inclusion of this feature would allow the application of DLP policies alongside antivirus policies via a single agent and console, making it more competitive as other OEMs often offer DLP solutions as part of their antivirus products.
Pre Sales Architect at network techlab
If the per GB data could be provided at a certain level free of cost or at the same cost which the customer is taking for the entire bundle, that would be better.
Cyber Security Information Security Specialist at MHM Holding GmbH
An alert of a security threat could be another type of notification that tells me something is important.
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
The integration is seamless.
Quality Assurance Manager at Unilever
Sometimes the endpoint will stop talking to the main console, which generally requires a reinstall on the endpoint.
Project Manager at Shell
Controlling the cloud environment, not just endpoints, is crucial.
COO at Panda Technology
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform could improve by being a little more hands-off, perhaps by having a team inside ThreatLocker that does all the vetting of patches; having one person hired by ThreatLocker to check out patches means that a million other industries using ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform do not have to vet the same patch, ultimately saving time and money around the world.
Technical Support Engineer at CMIT Solutions of Central Orlando
This feedback would help us understand what is learned in real-time, especially during a one-hour learning mode setup, ensuring we remain aware of potentially unnecessary learned items.
Server Administrator at Clay County Sheriff's Office
 

Setup Cost

Cortex XDR offers flexible pricing from $55 to $90 per endpoint annually, considered cost-effective for its advanced features.
Automox offers cost-effective per-endpoint pricing, scalability, and comprehensive support with a valuable free trial for evaluation.
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform offers cost-effective, scalable solutions with flexible pricing and included onboarding, praised for diverse organizational needs.
The pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks.
Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I would say it is definitely not a cheap product, considering how mature it is and how scalable all Palo Alto products are together.
Senior Process Expert at A.P. Moller - Maersk
Cortex XDR is perceived as expensive by some customers, yet offers dynamic pricing.
Cyber Security Manager at Welab bank
Cost reduction has been noticeable, ranging from 50% to 40%, especially because we do not have to travel from one place to another to go on site and troubleshoot devices.
Senior Software Engineer at AT&T
Automox's price is very cost-effective and affordable.
Data at Infosys
the price has always been competitive and very cost-effective
Project Engineer at Unilever
After conversations with other partners, it became clear we underpriced it initially, which caused most of our issues.
Director, Managed Services at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
We are moving towards the Unified solution, where they basically bundle everything together, providing us better stability with the ability to bring in new product offerings without having to go back to the customer and say, 'This is going to cost you.'
Supervisor, Client Security at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Money is saved because it is not costly, and I would suggest it for other companies.
Helpdesk Engineer at Computer Network Infrastructure (CNI) Consultants
 

Valuable Features

Cortex XDR provides advanced threat detection with AI analytics, real-time blocking, and seamless integration for enhanced security.
Automox offers automated, cloud-native patching with cross-platform compatibility, customizable worklets, and an intuitive dashboard for simplified security management.
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform enhances security with application control, just-in-time access, and centralized management, simplifying operations efficiently.
It incorporates AI for normal behavior detection, distinguishing unusual operations.
Cyber Security Manager at Welab bank
The product provides automation responses in case of a threat attack, severity assessments, centralized manageability, and comprehensive compliance features, resulting in reduced costs.
Pre Sales Architect at network techlab
It includes machine learning to easily analyze data and detect complex threats across endpoints, networks, or clouds.
Final Year Student at Gitam University
One of the best features I appreciate about Automox is automated patching.
Senior Data Reporting Analyst at University of Bradford
Automox allows me to patch all devices regardless of the operating system.
Quality Assurance Manager at Unilever
It has also improved our security posture since automated patching has allowed vulnerabilities to be patched automatically.
Data at Infosys
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform's ability to block access to unauthorized applications has been excellent.
Cyber Security Specialist at Bremmar Consulting
It protects our customers.
CTO at Zettabytes
The major benefit is fewer breaches overall, as nothing can be run without prior approval. This helps my company protect its data and secure itself effectively.
Tier 1 IT Engineer at a retailer with 11-50 employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Sponsored
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Automox
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
36th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (36th), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) (13th), Patch Management (14th)
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
6th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (7th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA (4th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automox is 0.2%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.2%, up from 0.7% 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 Networks3.5%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform1.2%
Automox0.2%
Other95.1%
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.
Raphael Tiji - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at AT&T
Unified patching and remote access have strengthened security and reduced support overhead
Automox has significant potential and we truly appreciate its features and capabilities. However, we have encountered several performance issues, particularly with the remote access tool. We believe that with some improvement, it could replace other tools that we currently use. Exclusion for updates should be improved in Automox. Integration with Tenable vulnerability management should be improved, as it should be included. I do not have any other improvements needed for Automox that I have not mentioned yet, perhaps only small or wish-list features.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business51
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise8
 

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 needs improvement with Automox?
Automox needs some improvement, particularly in that remote support for Linux is lacking. Additionally, remote suppor...
What is your primary use case for Automox?
Our main use case for Automox is that we as a company need to be Cyber Security Plus compliant, and therefore we need...
What advice do you have for others considering Automox?
Automox is a modern, simple-to-use, and powerful tool that works well for all sizes of organizations that have a mix ...
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 ...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Automox vs. ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.