No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
34th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
36th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (34th)
 

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 BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.8%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.1%, up from 0.8% 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 Networks3.8%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.8%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.1%
Other93.3%
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.
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.
reviewer2642739 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Delivery Analyst at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
User-friendly platform and dashboards provide comprehensive insights
I would like to see improvements on the operational side, specifically in grouping. Currently, I can group sensors into a custom group and assign policies, but I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance. This would be useful for organizing multiple sites or countries into a single group containing multiple sub-groups. Additionally, in the whitelisting case, if I want one policy to have specific whitelisting, but not all the machines in that policy to have it, I could use multiple groups belonging to the same parent group. It is a bit disappointing that whitelisting can only be done via policies and not for individual machines. If I need to whitelist for only one machine, I must create a specific policy. This poses a challenge with two thousand endpoints, making it nearly impossible to create two thousand different policies.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is the low consumption of system resources. The solution uses a lot of AI and machine learning."
"We think that this product will help us grow, as it meets our needs currently and we can grow with it over time."
"Cortex XDR lets us manage several clients from the same console, and its endpoint defense is more advanced than traditional antivirus."
"We have found in our test Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks to be a very good tool."
"The product is mostly automated, and we do not have to make decisions, because all the decisions are made by the product itself and we are not required to create any custom policies since the policies that are created are well defined in the product itself."
"Cortex covers everything I need. It's a perfect solution. Cortex provides a different level of visibility because it's an extended EDR, allowing you to grab logs from the network and firewalls. Palo Alto invented the concept of the extended EDR or XDR."
"Cortex is the best tool for endpoint detection, and I have used it to verify hashes or domains to identify malicious activity, trigger playbooks that automate and gather endpoint logs, block malicious processes, and update incident tickets, showcasing end-to-end processes with automation in investigation and reducing the analysis workflow."
"CylancePROTECT works on AI technology, is always up to date, and uses very few resources on your devices."
"The solution is pretty easy to scale."
"I've found the AI engine in CylancePROTECT to be particularly effective for technology and in preventing unknown threats."
"Has good RAM capacity for the power I need"
"We have been trained to learn how to use the product and now we have a very good experience with it."
"The solution is very quick at easily changing the levels of protection for each computer and the server."
"It secures different entry points into the network."
"The solution is extremely scalable. It's got the hybrid functionality, it's got the system functionality and cloud functionality as well."
"The initial setup is not overly complicated."
"Cybereason is helpful to organizations with a small security team, and with a single portal to manage and with it being a cloud portal, it really reduces the amount of overhead versus having a traditional on-prem solution."
"Cybereason absolutely enables us to mitigate and isolate on the fly. Our managed detection response telemetry has dropped dramatically since we began using it. It's very top-of-mind. We were running some tabletop exercises and none of the detections were getting triggered by the managed security services provider. So we needed to find a solution that would trigger high-fidelity alerts. That was Cybereason and it dramatically changed our landscape from the detection and response perspective."
"Cybereason's threat hunting and investigation are the most valuable features. Threat hunting is a user-friendly feature that keeps you safe. Investigation offers an added value that I haven't seen with other EDR services. It allows you to find specific policy problems within your environment."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"What I like most about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is the support because the support is good. The solution is also easy to use, and it has a dashboard. Everything is good, and there's no problem with it."
"Their EDR solution, the ability to mitigate issues through their command line, is probably the best feature that we've had. We use that all the time. It's very useful for doing investigations."
"I highly recommend this solution for any organization that is solely depending on normal AV."
 

Cons

"Managing the product should be easier."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"We have found that there are times Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks does not detect some of the viruses, we have to use another protection solution called Kaspersky."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"The dashboard could use some significant improvement, just making it more useful with more information. It has a limited amount of information right now. It is customizable, but I'd love to see a better out-of-box dashboard."
"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"Initially, we got to have a lot of false positives when we onboarded, but nowadays it's quite smooth."
"It could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required. The product's price should be more competitive."
"Making the dashboards a bit modern to make them easier to search would also be helpful."
"I'd like them to do software distribution too, but they said that that's architecturally not at the product line."
"The stability could be improved."
"They could improve on the false positives, reporting and whitelisting features."
"I would like to see a little bit of additional reporting or insight as to what it is doing exactly."
"Technical support needs to improve."
"The network coverage becomes an issue most of the time."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements. We have run across just a few. It is compatible with 90% of what we have in our network, but there is that 10% that we are still struggling with as far as compatibility with the type of PowerShell scripts needed to run our day-to-day business."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"It should be more stable, and the sensor needs improvement in terms of connectivity."
"What needs to improve in Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and what I'd like to see in its next release is a centralized dashboard that allows you to view what is there, similar to what's on Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager: a beautiful display and reporting. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response has to start with the compliance, the homepage, etc. Everything should be there and should be customizable. The options should be there. The tool is very good currently, but visibility for IT administrators is lacking and needs to be worked on."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am using the Community edition."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses."
"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."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"Currently, we have competitive pricing for Cylance, which is affordable enough to consider."
"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."
"The monthly fee is $55 USD per user."
"The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"CylancePROTECT's pricing is reasonable, at about €18 per user, per year."
"I think that the price we are paying is good for what it is."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"We considered a few other solutions. Some were ridiculously overpriced, while others didn't have solutions for Mac endpoints. That was a deal-breaker because most of our organization is on Mac. It came down to two vendors: Cybereason and another. They had similar pitches and almost identical approaches, but in the end, Cybereason gave us the best value for our money."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
920,939 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%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise57
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
 

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 is your primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.