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

Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs Deep Instinct Prevention Platform 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

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)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Elena Yau - PeerSpot reviewer
Prevention, in advance, saves us remediation time
We have a PHI (protected health information) committee, and some of the things that we review on a weekly basis are incidents. For example, if there was malware or adware or some kind of phishing attempt, or even ransomware, we would have to investigate and see if there was any PHI impact. We've seen small things because some kind of adware made its way through the browser from some malicious link, and it's really hard to prevent those. We're putting more levels of filtering around that. There are some product development ideas that we have been working on alongside the DI team, and they've been super helpful. There are definitely a lot more little areas of improvement for the interface. Also, we have talked with the DI team about adding the forensic piece, which is what we do a lot. That would be added value and they've just recently provided more individuals to think about the roadmap. That's part of their strategy and one of the good features that they want to bring on. Hopefully, they can bring that to fruition and that will ease our workflow a little bit more. The additional predictive and prevention capabilities in the 3.0 version, that don't require special rules and configuration, help our organization. The only caveat is that when things get done automatically, I would appreciate more logging of what's happening in the background, if it is doing some kind of intervention. If we need to do some forensics, we should be able to backtrack from the log that gets uploaded to our cloud instance and see, forensically, what the root cause was. We should be able to see what instigated that trigger by DI and what exactly was done. That's a missing piece. It does a good job of preventing, but then we don't know what were the symptoms of the prevention. Let's say that there was like a PowerShell block. We'll see an indicator on the dashboard and we'll look at the logs and investigate. Sometimes we find that the logs that are captured locally on the endpoint itself are not very thorough. We were coached through our training with DI that, when troubleshooting, the DI team would always ask for the logs from the endpoint. We know what we need to do to look at something. But the logging for DI doesn't capture everything. There are some things that are missing. When it comes to root-cause analysis, or kill-chain analysis, and figuring out exactly what happened, it's very hard to do that right now on the product. I have used Carbon Black before and they're pretty good with the forensic analysis. That does save some efforts of my one engineer and myself when we have to go through the PHI committee. Right now, with Di, that feels like a blind spot. Another area for development is making the license clean-up a little bit easier. We always have to manually uninstall agents. If there were some way to remove the licensing and do better license management on the platform, that would help my team as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The information the dashboard provides is very clear."
"The solution doesn't need a high level of technical training."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"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."
"Best solution for avoiding security breaches, malware attacks, and other kinds of security issues."
"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"One of the main benefits of the solution is its intelligence to correlate the events into an incident."
"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 most valuable features are the static/dynamic analyses. Deep Instinct's predictive model has very high accuracy and provides threat information for unknown malware, such as malware classification, static analysis information, and sandbox information."
"Instead of having features like rollback and after-event actionable stuff, the whole premise and the context of the solution is to actually prevent these malicious attacks from happening to begin with.... The ability to prevent threats is the most appealing aspect. It absolutely, 100 percent helps with real-time prevention of unknown malware. That's the strength of the product."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"The CPU consumption is low compared to what I have been using in my current environment, which is Sophos. The footprint is a lot smaller, about a quarter of Sophos. It is very small."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"It has given us a more structured approach for detecting and preventing threats. It has machine learning-based detection and prevention. Their engines, in even older versions, are able to pick these viruses and malware. They have posted a lot of use cases online for detecting different viruses and malware that have been out for many years."
 

Cons

"We would also like to have advanced tech protection and email scanning."
"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."
"If they had pulse rate detection, it would be better."
"Data privacy is a matter of concern. You have to be careful with data privacy, it can be sensitive and Cortex can have most of your access."
"It is not a suitable solution if you are looking for a single product with multiple features such as DLP, encryption, rollback, etc."
"When it comes to core analysis, and security analysis, Cortex needs to provide more information."
"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."
"In an upcoming release, the solution could improve by proving hard disk encryption. If it could support this it would be a complete solution."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"The Management Console is not localized."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"Due to the nature of deep learning, it’s sometimes difficult to determine why the AI model has blocked a specific file, although this has improved over time."
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"The interface on the endpoint could be a little more descriptive and more valuable. It doesn't always tell you the data you need to see. Improvement there would be very helpful."
"There's an issue in the installation process where you can't install it unless you disable the built-in Windows Bitdefender antivirus. So, you have to manually disable Microsoft Bitdefender in order to install Deep Instinct. So, that makes it impossible to do a network rollout unless you manually visit each computer, which is ridiculous."
"The Deep Instinct client stops working when you have two servers and you add high availability or Windows Failover Cluster mode. It doesn't work in a clustered mode. I haven't yet had time to go back and talk with their support and get it fixed. It would be good if they can make the installation independent of an actual user. Currently, its installation is dependent on the actual user being logged in. For example, a computer has to be logged in for the installation to happen. If it is not logged in, then on the cloud platform, it is going to show that the client is offline. On the management side of the cloud platform, we would like to have the administrators segregated by logical entities. We have told them that on their cloud management platform, we would like to be able to segregate clients into different logical entities or organizations so that the administrators are able to manage only those entities that are within their designated organization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't like that they have different types of licenses."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"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 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."
"I don't have any issues with the pricing. We are satisfied with the price."
"It's way too expensive, but security is expensive. You pay for your licensing, and then you pay for someone to monitor the stuff."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"The pricing is a little bit expensive but we are satisfied with DI's performance."
"There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool."
"Their pricing is very competitive. It is good, fair, and a lot cheaper than what we were doing with Cylance."
"We are a nonprofit. The MSP had provides pretty decent nonprofit rates for us. This was one of the key factors that made us choose Deep Instinct over its competitors who were significantly more expensive."
"One thing about their licensing program that I like is that just one covers the server as well as on the endpoint as well as mobile devices. There is no complexity in calculating how many SKUs I need for mobile, for laptop, for desktop, and for servers. It's very simple and that makes it much easier to budget."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"In comparison to the other products out there, it's exceptionally competitively priced. When you consider the lower administrative overhead that it facilitates, it's an absolute value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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. 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...
What do you like most about Deep Instinct?
The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
There is a need for customers of the product to pay towards the licensing costs of the tool.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
The solution's stability is good. If the tool was able to provide fine-tuning capabilities from the product's end depending on the environment of its user, then it would be a good improvement in th...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks vs. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.