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

BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs WatchGuard EPDR 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
8.6
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
WatchGuard EPDR
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (20th)
 

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 WatchGuard EPDR is 1.5%, down from 2.1% 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%
WatchGuard EPDR1.5%
BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity1.8%
Other92.9%
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.
Petri Alhainen - PeerSpot reviewer
Administrator at Sulbana Oy
Balanced endpoint protection has improved forensic visibility and speeds threat investigation
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific to say that you should do this or that. They are listening to the users, so they are fixing things as they've been found. I don't have any example to give. The pricing is always a thing where you need to be in the line that the balance to get it right is a challenging thing with WatchGuard EPDR. If you have good features, then you can have a little bigger price, but if you just get the balance right, that's important. I haven't used automated incident response in WatchGuard EPDR.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I recommend this solution to others because it is easy to manage, reliable, and overall good to use."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"If you are looking for security, mainly for advanced threat prevention from ransomware and malware attacks, I would recommend Cortex."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has helped us a lot with securing the whole environment and the whole IT structure, giving us full knowledge of what is happening on the client and enabling us to take action right away from a single point for managing security operations on the hosts."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is easy to use and does not consume a lot of hardware resources."
"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"I find the actual overall endpoint malware protection the most valuable feature of CylancePROTECT."
"What's most valuable in CylancePROTECT is the optics feature. I also like its easy-to-use and user-friendly dashboard and monitoring system."
"The solution’s AI is its most valuable feature."
"Specifically for a Windows domain environment, the product can be customized and pushed via GPO or SCCM without issue.​"
"We chose the solution because it doesn't have daily updates, which is important for us in healthcare IT, where network usage and connectivity to hospitals matter."
"The stability is perfect, and it is leaps and bounds beyond our previous solution by McAfee."
"The most valuable features are script blocking and macros within Word documents for stopping unwanted applications from running in the background."
"It is extremely simple to manage and deploy."
"The product so far has been good at protecting us. We haven't faced a breach."
"The deployment of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is easy and convenient."
"I've found it's got excellent web protection."
"What I appreciate the most about WatchGuard EPDR is that with the managed detection and response system, when there is an alert about the product running, the turnaround time for enabling it is less than two hours."
"I can put tons of load on it."
"We have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic."
"WatchGuard is commendable for its work on threats."
"The most valuable part of Panda Adaptive Defense 360 is its overall effectiveness as a good and decent security solution, providing comprehensive security which improves protection for devices significantly."
 

Cons

"The GUI could be improved."
"Enhancing UI simplicity and playbook flexibility are areas that could benefit from more low-code automation options for smoother integrations."
"Additionally, I think the price is very high, and if it can be adjusted, I believe it will be a very good solution."
"They've been having some issues with updating their endpoint agents, and it has been quite frustrating."
"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."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"The downsides of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks are that in many incidents, when I enter the causality chain, there are numerous logs."
"There are some third-party solutions that are difficult to integrate with, which is something that can be improved."
"Making the dashboards a bit modern to make them easier to search would also be helpful."
"​It needs real analysis of quarantined files. The EDR product isn't showing much right now."
"It just doesn't make you feel like you're getting covered or have the best protection, which you should have."
"It is hard to manage."
"It is not stable. The solution has caused six crashes over two years, with one of them requiring us to rebuild all of our Windows 10 devices."
"It should have better support for Windows and Mac."
"An area for improvement in CylancePROTECT is its pricing, as it's a bit costly."
"Having worked with SentinelOne, Cylance is good, however, it probably needs to add a feature similar to SentinelOne's rollback functionality. With this feature, if you get infected, with a click, you can go back to the pre-infection state. If Cylance could add this functionality to their offering as well, that would be ideal."
"They need to expand their offering of add-ons to enhance capabilities further."
"Occasionally, we suffer from little bugs that give us the wrong message."
"The solution should have additional endpoint protection."
"For some urgent updates, I don't like the need for the tool to be frequently restarted."
"The categories in the web filtering should be more comprehensive. When a URL is not categorized, I face issues."
"Needs a service desk system to link up with endpoint protection and email protection."
"They need to offer a clear dashboard so you can see everything everywhere all at once."
"It is hard to install and deploy on a Linux operating system."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"The price of the solution is high for the license and in general."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"Review closely how many endpoints you actually need before buying into a pricing level. Deal and deal with the VAR of your choice."
"The solution's pricing is around the same as most EDRs but slightly behind some of the major ones."
"We would just add more if there are new users, but right now you just need one license for per user."
"CylancePROTECT's pricing is reasonable, at about €18 per user, per year."
"The product cost is about $5, per user, per month."
"It's not so heavily priced; rather, it's average and decent."
"This cost of the license is approximately $5 USD monthly per user."
"The tool is not that expensive."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"The product is available at a high price."
"There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually."
"The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay."
"The solution's pricing is better compared to other products."
"The solution is priced well for what features it provides."
"I don't think Panda's license is too expensive, but they're charging more than it's worth. It's a yearly license. For 1,000 endpoints, it's around $18,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 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%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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 Business28
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise2
 

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 needs improvement with WatchGuard EPDR?
I think there's always something that needs to be improved about WatchGuard EPDR, but I don't have something specific...
What is your primary use case for WatchGuard EPDR?
I'm talking about WatchGuard EPDR, which is endpoint protection. I try to remember if we have them in our system, and...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Blackberry Protect
Panda Adaptive Defense 360
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Panasonic, Noble Energy, Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Charles River Laboratories, Rovi Corporation, Toyota, Kiewit
Indra, Valea AB, Fineit, Aemcom, Data Solutions INC., Gloucestershire NHS, Golden Star Resources Ltd, Hispania Racing Team, Instituto Dos Museus e da ConserÊo, Escuelas Pias Provincia Emaus, Axiom Housing Association, Municipality of Bjuv, Lesedi Nuclear, Mullsj_ municipality, Eng. skolan Norr AB, Dalakraft AB, Peter Green Haulage Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about BlackBerry Cylance Cybersecurity vs. WatchGuard EPDR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.