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

Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response vs Zscaler Client Connector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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)
Cybereason Endpoint Detecti...
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
29th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (35th)
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 Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is 1.2%, up from 0.9% 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%
Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response1.2%
Other94.6%
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.
Ivan Burke - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Research Development and Innovation at CSIR
Offers useful threat hunting and response capabilities but struggles to justify cost for smaller deployments
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR components; I also get involved with some of the XDR components, especially for the cloud. Regarding analysis features, such as deep behavioral detection, I do use it sometimes; I usually don't use the automated version of it, as I prefer threat hunting directly, depending on if the season is available. I know some of them have pretty good analytics engines, but I tend to do the threat hunting on my own. I manage incident response for a bunch of companies, so some of them have Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response integrated into Sentinel, some into Fortinet, and others into various tools. When considering cost-effectiveness, their pricing structure works such that if you're a large organization with more than a thousand endpoints to deploy to, then Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is worthwhile. But for anything less than 300, it's too expensive; obviously, the more you buy, the better the price, making it cheaper for you. Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response best fits enterprise-level businesses such as huge corporations; however, 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. We're trying to see how we can improve it with some of our clients, but at the moment, it's struggling compared to other EDR solutions that we have deployed. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response a six.
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

"It's a nice product that's stable and scalable."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"The interface is easy to use and it is more up to date than our previous solution."
"Cortex XDR's most valuable feature is its intelligence-based dashboards."
"This software helps us understand any issues that may arise when someone is not at work."
"On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks a nine."
"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"It is a simple platform to use."
"Cybereason has given me more coverage across more operating systems than what I have had in the past; I have more visibility now into a lot more areas."
"With Cybereason, we can never fail any business type because of the antivirus detection."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Cybereason reduced our detection by 85%."
"We like that it is a hybrid; it’s flexible, you can really do whatever you need to do, the initial setup is not overly complicated, the solution can scale, and it is stable and reliable."
"I haven't had any issues with the solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I highly recommend this solution for any organization that is solely depending on normal AV."
"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."
"It is very useful, and the logs are very helpful; when we go to logs, we understand what is happening."
"The solution operates in the background seamlessly without the user noticing."
"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."
"Zscaler Client Connector is quite scalable, and I would rate its scalability as nine or ten out of ten."
"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."
"I'd rate the solution nine out of ten."
"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."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks could improve by offering remote management. It would be useful to look at the client's issue to fix it."
"It is a complex solution to implement."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is not only pricey; it is extremely expensive."
"Managing the product should be easier."
"I would like to see improvement in the tool's user interface, particularly in the area of managing alerts and providing more reporting capabilities."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"There's room for improvement with Mac device installations, which can be challenging."
"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"I feel it is a shame that I cannot create groups of groups with inheritance."
"I would like to see improvements on the operational side, specifically in grouping."
"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."
"The integration with Microsoft solutions and Microsoft capabilities needs to be improved."
"The deployment on individual endpoints is more geared toward larger organizations. It might prove to be a bit too complicated for a smaller organization. You need to know what you're doing when you're deploying the sensor."
"The product's reporting isn't great."
"Its Microsoft PowerShell protections still need some compatibility improvements."
"There can be problems with the EDI."
"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."
"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."
"Zscaler Client Connector is not low in cost; it is definitely on the higher side."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"The tool's price is moderate."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is quite an expensive solution."
"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"This is an expensive solution."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"It has a yearly renewal."
"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."
"I do not have experience with the licensing of the product."
"The pricing is manageable."
"In terms of cost, this is a good choice for our needs."
"I had to go through a third-party to purchase it, which I wasn't really pleased about."
"This product is somewhat expensive and should be cheaper."
"In terms of pricing, it's a good solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing an eight."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 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%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
20%
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 Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
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 primary use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
My main use case for Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response is mostly for incident response.
What needs improvement with Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
When it comes to advanced threats, it sometimes helps me with finding them and hunting them down with threat detectio...
What advice do you have for others considering Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response?
I mostly work with incident response, so I work with a bunch of them interchangeably, but mostly with the EDR compone...
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
Cybereason EDR, Cybereason Deep Detect & Respond
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
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: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.