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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Zscaler Client Connector comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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

Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
32nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (41st)
Zscaler Client Connector
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zscaler Client Connector is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.1%
Zscaler Client Connector0.5%
Other98.4%
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
DA
IT Support Admin at Kuehne+Nagel
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

"The solution is efficient."
"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."
"They do a very good job of providing multi-stage visualizations of malicious operations that immediately show all attack details across all devices and users. Since it is MalOp-centric model, you can see if there has been a similar operation across multiple machines. If it is the same thing appearing on multiple machines, you see all the machines and users affected in one screen."
"What I find most valuable is the clarity of the platform."
"We didn't have the visibility that we now have. It has increased our visibility by a lot. So, we put a lot more time into really looking at our environment and what is happening throughout our different networks. It has increased our visibility by around fivefold."
"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."
"The initial setup was easy and straightforward."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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

"I feel that the product lacks reporting features and needs improvement."
"Reporting could be a bit more granular so that we had the ability to check regions and countries. I just noticed that, for instance, if I look at our servers, it's either "contained" or it's "not contained". I don't have the option, for instance, to look at countries. It only allows me to look at users as one big group."
"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."
"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."
"I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance."
"We are in the process of removing it from many of our endpoint clients because it's not really showing enough value for them at the moment."
"Compared to our previous endpoint, we have a lot more false positives and a lot more duplication of alerts. So we're chasing more alerts."
"Cybereason does not have sandbox functionality."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of Zscaler Client Connector needs improvement, as it often disconnects and reconnects."
"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."
"Zscaler Client Connector is not low in cost; it is definitely on the higher side."
"There is room for improvement regarding the price of Zscaler Client Connector, as it is one of the most expensive solutions available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The pricing is manageable."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"Though it is not the cheapest solution but it fits our budget. We pay an annual licensing fee."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
24%
Government
14%
Insurance Company
7%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
Comparison with other products showed it be cheaper than some larger competitors. Set up cost for us were cheaper as we already had users experienced with the product in other business units. Initi...
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zscaler Client Connector?
Zscaler Client Connector is notably costly, with pricing rated at five out of ten in terms of affordability, reflecting the premium pricing of the solution.
What needs improvement with Zscaler Client Connector?
Zscaler continues to strengthen the Zscaler Client Connector by introducing new features and expanding the platform’s capabilities. Their roadmap is mature, and in many areas they are ahead of comp...
What is your primary use case for Zscaler Client Connector?
I’m not working directly for Zscaler; I work with a partner organization as a Systems Integrator. Our work is not limited to Zscaler—we support multiple security and networking products. This inclu...
 

Also Known As

Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lockheed Martin, Spark Capital, DocuSign, Softbank Capital
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs. Zscaler Client Connector and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.