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

Avast Business Hub vs BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

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...
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)
Avast Business Hub
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
48th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (9th), Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) (22nd), Ransomware Protection (14th)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Avast Business Hub is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.3%, up from 1.2% 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%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.3%
Avast Business Hub0.9%
Other94.3%
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.
Crewmem67 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Consultant at College Notre Dame de Nazareth
Has a free version, is secure and reliable
I'm a consultant. I recommend free Avast, then ESET. If they want to be more secure, you can go to ESET, the bigger license. If you want to have a cheap license, Avast is good. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I do prefer ESET, however. Yet I would recommend either product as they are both pretty good.
Sooraj Makkancherrry - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Operations Manager at Philips
Doesn't have daily updates, which is important for healthcare IT
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable. It's a very good and new technology as a tool and antivirus. But sometimes, it doesn't work properly with our medical devices and products, quarantining files it shouldn't even after we add them to exclusions. This is tricky for us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"My advice for others looking into using Cortex is that it is very easy to use and very useful for the customer environment, whether it's a public or private one."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"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 protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"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 anti-exploit is impenetrable."
"I can highlight that we have not faced any security incidents with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, and even though our environment is quite dynamic, we have not faced any security incident with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks until now."
"The ease of deployment and the command center that they have are the most valuable. It is basically self-monitoring. It doesn't require that much tinkering after you deploy or install."
"The performance is good compared to other products that slow down the laptop, post-installation."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It warns you if there is a threat and it's perfect because it runs in the background and doesn't interfere with anything."
"The solution can scale well."
"The ease of deployment and the command center that they have are the most valuable; it is basically self-monitoring and doesn't require that much tinkering after you deploy or install."
"Avast as a product is as easy as it gets - everything is outlined and transparent in terms of licensing."
"The solution is quite stable and straightforward."
"The initial setup of CylancePROTECT is very easy."
"CylancePROTECT is very stable - we've had no issues with performance and no errors or bugs."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"It secures different entry points into the network."
"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
 

Cons

"The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
"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."
"Basically, they don't provide customer support tools just to investigate the logs."
"It is not easy to sell Cortex XDR, not because it isn't a good tool. Its marketing needs to be improved."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"The downsides of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks are that in many incidents, when I enter the causality chain, there are numerous logs."
"The installation should be easier and the Palo Alto pre-sales and sales teams should have more information on the product because they don't know what they are selling."
"It reduces network and bandwidth speed."
"The solution needs to be more secure and work to protect us better from people trying to mess with our systems."
"The solution could improve by providing more security."
"Where I have faced a challenge is on the reporting. I would like to see something that provides information regarding the next month or quarter, in terms of reporting."
"Making the price a bit cheaper would be an improvement."
"It could have a 10,000-feet overview of the whole infrastructure because the software is easily installable on the whole infrastructure and not just the infrastructure, but also the workstation themselves. I would love to have a 360 view of the whole network and basically see from where a test is coming, and if there is an instance in the cloud that is actually misbehaving or if there is a workstation that is infected and stuff like that. It can also have some kind of AI to detect all those things and then cut off the connection from that machine. In Cortex, you can link the logs, reports, and all that stuff. You can also see the full picture of when it happened, and you can trace it back all the way to a file or something else. I would like to see similar functionality in Avast Business Endpoint Protection."
"Where I have faced a challenge is on the reporting. I would like to see something that provides information regarding the next month or quarter, in terms of reporting."
"It could download faster during deployment."
"I would like to see a better UI in terms of sifting through more specific data and providing analytics."
"Additionally, their channel management has been lacking, with a notable disregard for small and medium-sized businesses, focusing primarily on large enterprises and very large MSPs."
"I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we contact support, they tell us to update the latest agent, but we can't do that immediately due to medical device protocols and validation testing. I wish support would try to understand our issues better instead of giving this standard response. The machine learning feature they use often tells us to upgrade the agent or add things to the exclusion list, which isn't unacceptable."
"Reporting is an area with shortcomings in CylancePROTECT that needs to be improved."
"CylancePROTECT's technical support is non-existent."
"The solution’s technical support could be improved."
"Making the dashboards a bit modern to make them easier to search would also be helpful."
"The user interface could be improved, it's very outdated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"There are no costs other than licensing."
"We are on a monthly subscription for Avast Business Endpoint Protection."
"If you become a partner, you will receive the wholesale price."
"I am using the free version of Avast."
"It is $75 per license for a year. There are no additional costs."
"I am using the free version."
"I think that the price we are paying is good for what it is."
"Our licensing cost for the solution is around $4,000 for six months. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"This cost of the license is approximately $5 USD monthly per user."
"Review closely how many endpoints you actually need before buying into a pricing level. Deal and deal with the VAR of your choice."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"The initial end-point cost may seem a little high (~$55/device/year) but when you look at the total peace of mind that the solution provides, with no reboots for updates, and negligible performance impact, it is well worth it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 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%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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 Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise13
 

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,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Blackberry Protect?
It is a good endpoint solution. It is very easy to manage and detect the threat immediately. It will take the necessa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Blackberry Protect?
The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Blackberry Protect?
I face challenges with the exclusion policy - it still scans folders we told it not to, causing issues. When we conta...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Blackberry Protect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Benassi & Benassi, P. C.
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Find out what your peers are saying about Avast Business Hub vs. BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.