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

Cisco Secure Endpoint vs Zscaler Client Connector 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 Detection and Response (EDR)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
Cisco Secure Endpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
26th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (29th), Cisco Security Portfolio (9th)
Zscaler Client Connector
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
23rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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 Cisco Secure Endpoint is 1.3%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Client Connector is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks3.5%
Zscaler Client Connector0.7%
Cisco Secure Endpoint1.3%
Other94.5%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

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.
JavedHashmi - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Technology Officer at Future Point Technologies
Reliable threat protection is achieved while integration and analysis capabilities need refinement
Cisco Secure Endpoint is very good in machine learning, which allows it to secure offline contents even if not connected to the internet. We haven't encountered a single breach after it's deployed. It controls USB devices and has a separate antivirus solution called Tetra, providing security even for real-time, day-zero attacks through its strong Talos threat intelligence platform.
DA
IT Support Admin at Kuehne & Nagel Inc.
Client activity has been monitored efficiently through in-depth log analysis and traffic filtering
I use the Zscaler speed test, and it is very nice. We use some logs from Zscaler Client Connector to collect data and see what is happening, such as if there is an interruption or something. There is a specific tunnel version that we have to use because, depending on the internet provider, some of them have lower speed, so we have some issues. This is because of the provider, not from Zscaler. We use Office 365 services and Office applications, and because some connections are slow and they do not have full coverage from the internet provider, we have some issues. If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down. This may be because they put some policy. Of course, if you use Office 365 services such as Outlook, the minimum bandwidth is 5 megabits and more, so this causes issues if the users do not have a good remote connection. This depends on the companies and the users, so they need to fix it. This is not from us or our company. It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful. When we go to logs, we understand what is happening.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Automation and playbooks have helped me significantly, as Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, efficiently detecting and blocking malicious attacks with firewalls while eliminating workload and speeding responses for next-generation operations."
"It has a higher cost than other solutions, like CrowdStrike or Microsoft’s EDR tools, but it reduces the cost of our operations because it’s a new generation antivirus tool."
"Cortex XDR alerts us on the dashboard when there's a threat, which allows us to restrict that user and helps secure our infrastructure."
"The best feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is that it collects logs from different sections such as the endpoint, the network, and the cloud, making it easy to investigate alerts, collect some of the investigation packages related to the infected machines, and provide live response."
"Stability is a primary factor, and then there's the ease of distribution and policy management; Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very easy to work with, and we're quite happy with them."
"The solution allows control over the user and his machine through Cortex XDR security policies."
"Cortex XDR can integrate the firewalls and determine the tendencies of the attacks. It's a new generation antivirus, with protection endpoints and detection response. It is very easy to use and everybody can operate the solution."
"The tool is designed to scale for large enterprises and handle large volumes of data."
"The best feature that we found most valuable, is actually the security product for the endpoint, formerly known as AMP. It has behavioral analytics, so you can be more proactive toward zero-day threats. I found that quite good."
"One of the best features of AMP is its cloud feature; it doesn't matter where the device is in regards to whether it's inside or outside of your network environment, especially right now when everybody's remote and taking their laptops home, because you don't have to be VPNed into the environment for AMP to work and AMP will work anywhere in the world as long as it has an Internet connection, giving you protection and reporting so no matter where the device is, AMP has still got coverage on it and is protecting it while you still have the ability to manage and remediate things, making the cloud feature the magic bullet and what makes the solution a valuable tool as far as I'm concerned."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"The product itself is pretty reliable. The security features that it has make it reliable."
"The console feature gives a centralized management of what's going on, and if something happens, it gives you an alert. So, that's the most important feature for me."
"The product's initial setup phase was very simple."
"The Cisco suite of security solutions definitely gives us a great deal of comfort that we are doing that."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
"Zscaler Client Connector is quite scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine or ten out of ten."
"The real-time analytics feature in Zscaler Client Connector is another valuable feature called Digital Experience, or ZDX, which can easily identify the root cause of issues accessing public or internal resources and provide good analysis so relevant teams can quickly resolve them, making it a very good tool that helps customers."
"The best features of Zscaler Client Connector are that it gives the client a much more transparent experience, as they don't have to worry about connecting to a VPN."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"Zscaler Client Connector has eliminated VPN bottlenecks and outages, improved user productivity with instant secure access, and reduced help desk tickets related to VPN issues, overcoming 60% of VPN-related problems while allowing faster onboarding of remote users and better enforcement of zero-trust security policies."
"It is very important to see what is happening between the user and the applications that we have, and to filter the traffic from outbound traffic and inside traffic."
"I'd rate the solution nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"Basically, they don't provide customer support tools just to investigate the logs."
"It's not an ideal choice for smaller businesses, as you need a minimum of 200 endpoints to even use the solution at all."
"Additionally, I think the price is very high, and if it can be adjusted, I believe it will be a very good solution."
"The dashboard is the area that needs to improve so that we can have the ability to drill down without having to go elsewhere to verify results."
"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."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around."
"The solution eats memory of the computer, unlike anything I've ever seen."
"The downside to the solution is that there are a large number of false positives."
"The product does not provide options like tunnel creation or virtual appliances."
"The reporting and the need for the documentation to be updated and current would be my two biggest areas of complaint."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"Cisco Meraki could benefit from AI assistance or intelligent assistance features. Compared to competitors like Juniper, Cisco Meraki currently lacks a digital network assistant, which is an area Cisco is reportedly working on."
"The Linux agent is a simple offline classic agent, and it doesn't support Secure Boot, which is important to have on a Linux machine. The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers. We didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either. Eventually, we had to shut down the Exploit Prevention system. We didn't like that as we always want a solution that can fit smoothly into the setup without causing problems, especially where security is concerned. The tool also caused CPU spikes on our production machine, and we were seriously considering moving to another product."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"Cisco Secure Endpoint is an expensive solution."
"The Linux agent has conflicts with other solutions, including the Exploit Prevention system found in Windows servers, and we didn't find a fix during troubleshooting, and Cisco couldn't offer one either."
"Zscaler Client Connector is not low in cost; it is definitely on the higher side."
"There is a hard learning curve for Zscaler Client Connector; their support isn't the greatest all the time."
"There is room for improvement regarding the price of Zscaler Client Connector, as it is one of the most expensive solutions available."
"The stability of Zscaler Client Connector needs improvement, as it often disconnects and reconnects."
"I rate this product nine out of ten because I have seen some minor instability issues after updates and some room for UI improvement for deeper analytics, with instances of major issues after updating the GCC that required rollbacks."
"If the speed is slow for Zscaler Client Connector connection, then we have issues because if the speed is not good, then Zscaler Client Connector goes down."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"Every customer has to pay for a license because it doesn't work with what you get from a managed services provider."
"The price of the product is not very economical."
"In terms of the cost Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is very expensive because we are a Mexican company and when you translate dollars to pesos the cost is very high. The solution is very expensive for Mexican companies. I understand that they have international prices, but I do not think it offsets the price enough for many companies in countries, such as Mexico. The amount it is reduced is not a massive percentage."
"The price was fine."
"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."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"The pricing and licensing fees are okay."
"Its price is fair for us."
"The price is very fair to the customer."
"I rate the pricing a five or six on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"Cisco Secure Endpoint is not too expensive and it's not cheap. It's quite fair."
"The price is very good."
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
7%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise52
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise5
 

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 Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco is aggressive in pricing, making it competitive and sometimes even cheaper than other good products like CrowdS...
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Endpoint?
Cisco Secure Endpoint lacks features like DLP which other vendors offer. XDR is new, so integration capabilities with...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Secure Endpoint?
We deployed Cisco Secure Endpoint for our customers two to three years back. The use case was to secure their endpoin...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zscaler Client Connector?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing is fair, though it is a bit costly. It oper...
What needs improvement with Zscaler Client Connector?
For Zscaler Client Connector, I would appreciate more granular control over the client update rollout and slightly fa...
What is your primary use case for Zscaler Client Connector?
My main use case of Zscaler Client Connector is to provide secure, seamless access to the internet and internal appli...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
Cisco AMP for Endpoints
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Heritage Bank, Mobile County Schools, NHL University, Thunder Bay Regional, Yokogawa Electric, Sam Houston State University, First Financial Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Endpoint vs. Zscaler Client Connector and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.