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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs Fortinet FortiClient comparison

Why PeerSpot?
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)
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersec...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
30th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Fortinet FortiClient
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Compliance (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity is 1.6%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiClient is 1.9%, up from 1.8% 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%
Fortinet FortiClient1.9%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.6%
Other92.7%
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.
KL
Senior Technical Manager at Flexaccel
Remote access has become seamless and secure while deployment remains simple for our users
Performance could be improved today. People are now moving toward SASE, which stands for Secure Access, Secure Edge Solution. Fortinet also has that offering, which would be easier since it operates through the cloud, acting as a first line of defense. When the user connects to the internet, they connect to the cloud first for posture assessment and monitoring before connecting to the outside world. The impact is significant because nowadays people are adopting SASE. During COVID time, many users were trying to connect back to their office, causing the performance or CPU utilization of the firewall to increase tremendously, which slowed down performance. I have not worked with endpoint telemetry in Fortinet FortiClient that could have been helpful for threat mitigation.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"We switched because there were a lot of added features with Palo Alto that Check Point didn't have, and it was an upgrade for us."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"In one single alert, we are getting the network telemetry, endpoint telemetry, email security telemetry, and proxy telemetry all in one single ticket, making it very easy."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"The biggest positive impact I see from Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a significant reduction in the number of people required to manage it."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"A user can continue to add endpoints and the solution will continue to perform well."
"It does a good job of protecting us."
"The initial endpoint cost may seem a little high (~$55/device/year), but when you look at the total peace of mind that the solution of Cylance endpoint protection provides, with no reboots for updates, and negligible performance impact, it is well worth it."
"The most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT is the support."
"Endpoints are protected in real-time without the need of a centralized server, whitelist, or the ability to connect to a central host in the cloud."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"The stability of the solution is awesome."
"Specifically for a Windows domain environment, the product can be customized and pushed via GPO or SCCM without issue.​"
"FortiClient has good signatures, good protection and, up until recently, it integrated really well with our firewall."
"I think the solution is highly scalable."
"Fortinet FortiClient offers a vulnerability test feature, allowing us to monitor end-user devices. This includes ensuring necessary updates, such as Windows updates, are not overlooked."
"The solution has improved our organization as the VPN has allowed us to work from home, which has been quite handy during COVID, and we can work from anywhere, making work much more flexible."
"The product works fine and I have never had any problems with it."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's fast and safe."
"I would recommend FortiClient; this is a really good security product in the market."
"The most valuable features of FortiClient are that it can be integrated with Active Directory to the central authentication and that I can manage the permissions."
 

Cons

"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"The encryption is not up to the mark."
"Every 30 or 40 days, there's a new version and we need to go and make sure our customer's laptops are upgraded."
"The GUI could be improved. It's a little bit cumbersome. It could be more user-friendly."
"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"I have run into some detection issues with Cortex XDR. It needs to be better at detection of internal attacks."
"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."
"If you compare it to SentinelOne, which has more functionalities and detection capabilities on an open platform, the pricing on SentinelOne is far more reasonable and cheaper than Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks."
"The product must make the interface a little more user-friendly."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"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."
"Reporting is an area with shortcomings in CylancePROTECT that needs to be improved."
"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 could have integration with industrial base HMIS or Human Machine Interfaces Solutions."
"If they can improve the technical support SLA, that aspect of the product will be much appreciated."
"While you are working, you are finding these things that were supposed to be waived have come back to being blocked. That's frustrating."
"The user interface is a bit sluggish and needs improvement."
"While we like patch management, it would be nice if it could handle patch management for other solutions, like Microsoft."
"Compatibility issues between different versions."
"The pricing is not cheaper compared to competitors. For price satisfaction, it rates at seven out of ten and could be improved."
"Technical support needs to determine priority level based on the cases rather than the support package bundle."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting."
"They are clever guys. They make you buy more than one solution instead of putting everything together."
"The solution should have faster turnaround when it comes to new technology."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"The cost depends on your chosen license type, like Pro or other licenses."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution."
"The price was fine."
"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 like that they have different types of licenses."
"It is present, but when compared to other competitive products, I would say it is not less expensive; however, when all of the other added values are considered, the price is reasonable."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"CylancePROTECT is worth the money, but I'm not sure of its exact price. I can't remember off the top of my head."
"My company is on a yearly CylancePROTECT subscription. Price-wise, the solution is slightly expensive, so I'd rate it as eight out of ten."
"The licensing part of the product is too expensive compared to other solutions in the market."
"Do not get hung up on price. You pay for what you get and expensive will hurt one time, where cheap will hurt forever, especially if you fall victim to a ransom attack, etc.​"
"It is expensive, but not unreasonable."
"The price is reasonable for us at the moment. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten."
"Our licensing cost for the solution is around $4,000 for six months. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"Review closely how many endpoints you actually need before buying into a pricing level. Deal and deal with the VAR of your choice."
"As a technical team member, I am not responsible to look into the pricing matters. These aspects are typically handled by the management team, who have the authority to obtain the necessary licenses based on certain established principles."
"An annual license costs about 1.5 to 3,000 US dollars. There are no additional costs."
"The solution's scalability is inexpensive."
"We are using the free version of this product."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"Pricing is an area that I would like to see improved, as it could be lower."
"The solution is more cost efficient than Cisco, as FortiGate tends not to charge for the client license, which allows one to make free use of whatever is supported on the device."
"I rate the product's pricing a seven out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise55
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business59
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise25
 

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 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...
What is your primary use case for Blackberry Protect?
I am using CylancePROTECT as an active learning algorithm. We installed it on almost 20,000 servers and virtual machi...
How does Fortinet FortiClient compare with Open VPN Access Server?
Fortinet FortiClient is a feature-rich solution that is easy to use and deploy without sacrificing safety and securit...
What's the difference between Fortinet's FortiEDR and FortiClient?
I suggest Fortinet’s FortiEDR over FortiClient for several reasons. For starters, FortiEDR guarantees solid protectio...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiClient?
The solution is not cloud-based; it comes from the firewall itself.
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
FortiClient
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. Fortinet FortiClient and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.