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

Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs Tanium comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 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)
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (7th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (6th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (2nd)
Deep Instinct Prevention Pl...
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
31st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (16th)
Tanium
Ranking in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP)
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Server Monitoring (3rd), Vulnerability Management (23rd), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (21st), Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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 Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tanium is 2.3%, down from 2.6% 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 Networks3.5%
Tanium2.3%
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform0.9%
Other93.3%
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.
Tom Foal - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Klaatu IT Security Ltd
Stops ransomware before it executes and reduces response time for the team
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data storage, backups, and other related areas. It is difficult to think of what they could improve, but low information provided by the system when it detects something is one area, particularly in scripting. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform detects malicious scripts but it needs better measures, perhaps signing scripts, so we can be sure that a script is created by a client, not by some malware. It is really about helping us triage incidents effectively, so a bit more help with the analysis of incidents, particularly what the Deep Instinct Prevention Platform agent has discovered, would be beneficial. We need to know what it has spotted that makes it suspect malware.
MA
Division Manager, Information Technology at a legal firm with 51-200 employees
Centralized policies have improved remote endpoint control and have simplified data visibility
The integration is not simple and easy. It requires experienced users or people who have done the implementation. When certain policies are applied, they do not immediately push the policies. For example, we manage endpoint device USB access. We set a policy to block it, but it does not come into effect immediately. Sometimes it takes three or four days for it to reflect. That is a pain point. I have raised this issue with support as well, but they said that I need to limit the number of devices in the policy. In terms of application deployment, for us, it was seamless.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The most valuable feature of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is its machine-learning capabilities. Additionally, there is full integration with other solutions."
"Cortex XDR is stable, offering high quality and reliable performance."
"We can use Cortex XDR to get the entire graph of the incidents from source to destination, and we can take remedial action."
"The solution helps find bugs, and it is safe to use to prevent attacks by hackers."
"It is easy to use."
"What I like about Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is that it is a comprehensive solution that contains everything the organization may need when using endpoints."
"Provides behavior-based detection which offers many benefits over signature-based detection."
"No valuable quote available from the provided review sections."
"The most important thing is that it is for prevention. It prevents attacks of any type of malware. Normally, what we've seen in other products is that they are not for prevention. They isolate a possible threat that they don't understand or know about, and then they check it with our database to see if it needs any correction or elimination. This means that the threat is already inside a customer's base, whereas Deep Instinct prevents a threat from getting in. Prevention is basically done by an agent in each installation, PCU, or product. An agent has its own intelligence to be able to detect if it should stop a threat or not. It has been taught. It is like a brain that has been taught to react according to any possible threat. Deep Instinct is very light. It doesn't take too much CPU attention or memory. It doesn't slow down the performance. You don't really realize any change in the performance, which makes it very different from other solutions. They are usually heavy for the users."
"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 most valuable feature is its ability to detect and eradicate ransomware using non-signature-based methods."
"The product offers integration capabilities and is also easy to use."
"It's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"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 solution is scalable and helps to understand how infrastructure works. It helps to improve the health of the organization."
"I find the inventory and compliance features of Tanium to be the most impressive."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the consolidation of all historical data on device endpoints, security drivers, firmware, and Software version gaps."
"For incident response tasks, all these tasks can get done in minutes with minimal disruption to the end-user."
"Tanium is stable and it is also lightweight."
"When I push a quick update, it's done right away, and I can rescan immediately to confirm completion within minutes."
"The solution's technical support is very responsive."
"I like the fact that you can create patching campaigns depending on the area of your network that you want to address first. I like the ability it has to make several campaigns that work in parallel."
 

Cons

"Cortex XDR is trickier to configure than other Palo Alto products. This is one area where we are not so satisfied."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR does not detect malicious activity like in other anti-virus solutions like Trend Micro and Windows with Cisco."
"Cortex does not offer an on-premises solution. However, some customers would prefer not to be on the cloud. It would be ideal if it could offer something on-prem as well."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response)."
"It would be good to have a better way to search for a file within the UI."
"The solution lacks real-time, on-demand antivirus."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is a very good product, but financially, it is very expensive, so the company should look into that area."
"They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"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."
"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."
"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"
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"I am looking forward to them adding Linux in Q1 or Q2 of 2019, as this is often requested by my partners and customers. Currently, Deep Instinct only has Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS."
"I would like to have more integrations and custom plugins to input. Integration is always a big deal in a lot of different environments."
"The most painful thing is the interface. It's a bit unclear sometimes."
"Most of the time, agent-relative issues have to be more equipped with self-healing features. At times, the agent is there, but for some reason, it doesn't report a status. It gives certain problems that are obviously agent-based."
"We had some issues with the solution's OS upgrade."
"Tanium’s scalability could be improved."
"There are some bugs in the product. The tool needs to improve in the area of reporting."
"The performance could improve in future releases. We have had performance issues in specialized web environments, but overall I think the problems are less than 2% of the computer systems being used."
"Tanium's limitations should be improved because although it is a great tool, it is limited to only a few classes during a session."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing for Palo Alto Networks Cortex XDR can be costly, especially when it comes to a hundred users. A license is required for each user, and the subscription must be renewed on a yearly basis."
"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 price of the solution could be reduced. I have customers that have voiced that the solution is good for the value but if I want to sell more of the solution the price reduction would help."
"If one wishes to work with another team or large number of users at a future point, he must purchase a license for them."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"I don't recall what the cost was, but it wasn't really that expensive."
"We pay about $50,000 USD per year for a bundle that includes Cortex XDR."
"The price was fine."
"Its pricing is too high, but that is not because of the product. It is expensive because of the cost of the console. You need a console to control the whole thing, but the console is expensive. You have to split this cost among all possible users. Normally, to be able to make it economically attractive, you need at least 1,000 agents, PCs, or users. If you have a customer with 300 to 500 agents, PCs, or users, it becomes too pricey."
"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."
"Pricing and licensing are very straightforward. It's two SKUs, one is for the console and the other is for the client."
"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."
"There are no additional costs on the price, and our company has a support contract, which bundles in those services anyway."
"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."
"There is an annual license required to use this solution."
"Tanium is a more expensive solution in Latin America than some of the competitors, such as BigFix."
"The product's pricing differs from region to region depending on negotiations and the number of endpoints."
"It is higher than some competitors in the market."
"The solution is expensive but it's a good investment."
"The solution offers value for money."
"It's an expensive solution. It would be nice if the cost were lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions are best for your needs.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
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,...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Deep Instinct?
The price for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is reasonable. It is about the same price as any other antivirus.
What needs improvement with Deep Instinct?
A potential area of improvement for Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is their focus on file uploads and large data s...
What is your primary use case for Deep Instinct?
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is basically a stopper that prevents any malware, including zero-days. The main ben...
What needs improvement with Tanium?
While there is always room for improvement, I am pleased with Tanium.
What is your primary use case for Tanium?
The primary use case for Tanium ( /products/tanium-reviews ) is compliance, patching, and inventory as part of the co...
What advice do you have for others considering Tanium?
For smaller companies, Tanium is quite a big investment, and one needs to have a considerable setup to make it econom...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
No data available
Tanium Inc Cloud, Tanium XEM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Information Not Available
JPMorgan Chase, eBay, Amazon, US Bank, MetLife, pwc, Cerner, Delphi, MGM Grand, New York Life
Find out what your peers are saying about Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Tanium and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.