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

Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection vs Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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

Bitdefender Hypervisor Intr...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
64th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (54th)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Net...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (7th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

Muhammad-Imran - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable but bad technical support, and an out of date database
We primarily use the solution to protect our business The solution protects us so that we have regular security from attacks. It prevents disasters from happening on our system. The endpoint protection is the solution's most valuable feature. The database needs improvement. It needs to be…
Mohammad Qaw - PeerSpot reviewer
Perfect correlation and XDR capabilities for network traffic plus endpoint security
The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR. If you are not integrating it or feeding in your network traffic, then you are just buying a normal antivirus which doesn't make any sense. You are paying double the price to use the antivirus feature or to say you have XDR, but in reality you are not using it. The solution should include an on-premises option because some customers want only on-premises. It would be hard, but good to do if possible. Open XDR would be beneficial in the future. Right now, the solution is Closed XDR so cannot communicate with the few new vendors in the Open XDR market.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the simplicity of this solution and the fact that it saves us time. The deployment was really straightforward and useful and I am impressed by the anti-virus endpoint detection and response offered by this solution."
"The solution has exchange protection. It has a content control, device control, a firewall, and anti-malware as well. They are all quite valuable features for us."
"The endpoint protection is the solution's most valuable feature."
"On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks a nine."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"The tool's use cases are relevant to security."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
 

Cons

"There needs to be better integration with the environment. Especially, for the active directory and also for keeping up with the changes from Microsoft. We use a lot of Microsoft OS. I have noted that sometimes they lag behind Microsoft updates. For example, when with Windows 10. I had some issues with deploying to Windows 10 because the solution was behind in updating their own services to match the Microsoft release."
"The database needs improvement. It needs to be updated quite a bit."
"There are blurred lines between anti-virus and endpoint detection so I would say it can be confusing when you are considering buying this program. I would like to see that being explained better to the customer."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"There are a large number of false positives."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"The GUI could be improved."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses. For example, if users select a license, they think they will have all the platforms they need to improve their network or security. But after some time, Palo Alto Networks changed their licensing, and some of the features that, for example, were free at the beginning now have a cost. I think the integration can be improved. For example, a lot of tools are just integrated through APIs."
"When it comes to malware files, it should be a little quick because, at times, it would give a wrong result in the sense of what it might be on malware, even if it still might be a normal one."
"It's more focused on network communication. If a customer wants to increase the level of protection and start working with documents, it's impossible to integrate these features into the system. It's more of a communication-oriented system than a content security-oriented system."
"Cortex XDR could be improved with more GUI features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There's a yearly cost for licensing. For us, that comes to $1,400. There are no additional costs beyond the license itself."
"Very costly product."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"This is an expensive solution."
"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."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"This is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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. The ability to reverse damage caused by ransomware with minimal interruptions to...
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 that are very scalable, secure, and user-friendly. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto offers ...
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, applies behavioral-based endpoint protection and response, and includes risk-ba...
 

Also Known As

HVI
Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kansas Development Finance Authority (KDFA), Quilvest
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection vs. Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.