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

CylanceENDPOINT vs ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 17, 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
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
115
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (5th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (4th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
CylanceENDPOINT
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
63rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Pla...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
5th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (4th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (4th), Application Control (1st), ZTNA as a Service (5th), ZTNA (5th), Ransomware Protection (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.9%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CylanceENDPOINT is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is 1.3%, up from 0.8% 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 Networks3.9%
ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform1.3%
CylanceENDPOINT0.3%
Other94.5%
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.
Raphael Haroun  Ikyagh - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at Letshego
Stable, good for malware detection and prevention
I use it for general endpoint protection and the usual stuff like malware detection and prevention It secures my environment.  One thing that could be easier is initiating scans. If I want to scan an extra drive, it should be more straightforward. It's a bit clunky. I have been using it for…
Santo Joy - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Cyber Security at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Security controls have been strengthened with granular application, ringfencing, and access policies
The features of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that I like the most are the Ringfencing, elevation control, storage control, and application whitelisting functionality. For examples of how these features benefit my company, we were looking for a solution across various vendors to actually implement application whitelisting controls. ThreatLocker's agent, which is very lightweight and does not use much CPU or RAM, helped us achieve that solution. Ringfencing was an add-on that ticked off a lot of Australian framework security controls, which is the reason we chose it. My impression of the allowlisting feature in terms of managing which software, scripts, and libraries run on my devices is that ThreatLocker's community page has a lot of information around this, which is very helpful. Not only that, the Cyber Hero support that ThreatLocker provides gives us insights and best practices, helping us achieve that solution and guiding us to the right platform. The impact of Ringfencing on controlling the behavior of approved applications has been a big winner for us because it is something that many other platforms do not provide as a functionality. Having that allowed us to identify what applications talk to each other, which is something that many other platforms do not do. The network control feature impacts my ability to manage network traffic across my endpoints and servers. We have not used this widely across all our partners, but wherever required, we use it. It has been an easy solution for those customers to get that control implemented. The elevation feature's role in facilitating just-in-time administrative access for approved applications shows that elevation control helps in many use cases involving remote control platforms, door usage, and security system platforms that require local admins. There are many solutions that provide this functionality, but the licensing cost seems to be expensive, and it also adds another solution into the mix. Rather than doing that, we try to use ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform to achieve that control. Regarding the storage control feature, I have used it. The primary function is USB blocking, which is very widely adopted, and also just locking down and allowing certain users to access certain file locations helps us there. When it comes to enforcing policy-driven access over various storage devices, it depends on the business risk adapted by the companies that we support, but generally the use case is USB and external storage devices where companies know that is a risk, but they do not have appropriate solutions. There are EDR platforms that claim to do this, but ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform does it at an advanced level. My assessment of the efficiency of the real-time threat intelligence and category controls employed by Web Control in blocking malicious and non-compliant sites leads me to think that Web Control is another functionality within ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform that is an add-on on top of the current set. That is another solution that we use based on what is required for the company, but again, that is not widely adapted yet for our partners.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They have a new GUI which is just fantastic."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks saves time in various ways, although the user interface is fairly standard."
"But overall, when we speak about security and protection, they are one of the top providers."
"From the Palo Alto side, whatever they buy, they integrate that really well into their integration suite, and that makes a massive difference."
"The most valuable features are incident creation, policy-based protection, IP whitelisting, and device encryption. These are beneficial for endpoint and server security."
"It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core."
"Overall, it's a great platform; it integrates very well with other solutions from Palo Alto and also with our vendors, the ease of use is excellent, I love the root cause analysis from Cortex, which is amazing, and in a few clicks you can have the full root cause."
"The most valuable aspect of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks for me is its integration with AI detection, where we get to know the behavioral detection based on users, traffic patterns, and different services that we consume."
"It secures my environment."
"If all of our vendors would act and support us like ThreatLocker does, we would be happy."
"I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform benefits my company by allowing us to be preventative instead of being retroactive or reactive."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has absolutely saved us money, and I sleep better at night because of it, as we have the MDR package as well and just knowing someone is watching those endpoints at 3:00 a.m. is a lifesaver that you cannot put a dollar figure on."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped my company save on operational costs or expenses by freeing up a lot of time on the IT side of the team."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has helped our company save on operational costs and expenses significantly."
"ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform has definitely saved us on operational costs and expenses by preventing incidents."
"Blocking is done comprehensively."
 

Cons

"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"In general, the price could be more competitive."
"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere."
"The setup is quite easy. We had appropriate support from the manager. One thing that was missing was the integration part."
"The playbooks could be improved to include more functionalities or actions."
"The solution should add unwanted malicious hash values to a block list so that whenever the action is triggered, it will automatically prevent the malicious content."
"The solution should force customers to integrate with network traffic to see the full benefits of XDR."
"One thing that could be easier is initiating scans."
"It has not reduced helpdesk tickets. It has probably increased them by blocking applications and doing its job, resulting in people raising more tickets to know why they cannot use certain things."
"It is a little frustrating on my end since I like to go as quickly as I possibly can, and it slows me down."
"I find that the learning mode is too accessible. Technicians sometimes default to it instead of manually building policy controls. I would prefer the learning mode to be harder to access, ideally hidden behind a layer that requires creating at least one policy first before using the learning mode as a supplement."
"I have not seen a return on investment yet, but there is a small amount of time saved because of fewer dashboards."
"From one to ten, I would rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten just because the initial setup was a little confusing."
"I would suggest further developing the Web Control aspect of ThreatLocker Zero Trust Endpoint Protection Platform and also having better compatibility with Apple devices and mobile devices."
"The snapshots used in the ThreatLocker University portal are outdated snippets and have not been updated in conjunction with the portal itself."
"If I have to say what they can improve, one area would be making policy tuning and onboarding simpler for large enterprise environments."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution."
"The price is on the higher side, but it's okay."
"It is "expensive" and flexible."
"I am using the Community edition."
"It's the most expensive solution, but features-wise, it's quite strong. It's very good for protection, so the results are very good in the case of protection. I would rate it a two out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The pricing is a little high. It is per user per year."
"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."
Information not available
"The pricing is reasonable and normal. I do not have any problems with the cost."
"We have not had any real issues with the pricing. As they have added more features, due to the way our contracts are structured with our customers, we have had to hold off on adopting the new features because they do add costs."
"We have encountered a few challenges regarding pricing, contract renewals, and additions. As we explored adding features like Cyber Hero, it proved to be an increased expense for our clients. This was primarily a mistake on our part due to how we initially priced it to clients."
"I do not deal with pricing, but I assume it is cost-effective for us. We choose a solution based on functionality and affordability."
"The price of ThreatLocker Allowlisting is reasonable in the market, but it is not fantastic."
"I do not know about the licensing and price as it comes bundled from our MSP. However, it seems fairly reasonable for us, which is why we chose it."
"Others say ThreatLocker is too expensive, and I tell them they're dreaming. It's well-priced for what it does."
"I find ThreatLocker's pricing to be reasonable for the services it provides."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
No data available
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business46
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise54
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business56
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise12
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is straightforward, and there are no issues.
What needs improvement with ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
Improvements for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform could include some additional guidance in the beginning of setup. W...
What is your primary use case for ThreatLocker Allowlisting?
My main use case for ThreatLocker Zero Trust Platform is endpoint protection, a zero trust platform for applications,...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Protect, Allowlisting, Network Control, Ringfencing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, SentinelOne, CrowdStrike and others in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP). Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.