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

ESET Inspect vs Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 9, 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) (5th), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
33rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
27th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Ransomware Protection (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.4%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations is 0.8%, up from 0.5% 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 Networks3.4%
Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations0.8%
ESET Inspect1.1%
Other94.7%
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.
Moshiur-Rahman Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at IOPoint.com
Provides reliable and comprehensive internet security solutions without significant system slowdowns
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side, we utilize it on our Windows Server.  The platform has improved our organization's security by providing comprehensive antivirus and internet security solutions. It is fast and…
Zunair Aftab - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports Engineer at Rawad IT Solutions
Security features excel while management tools face challenges
Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud has proven to be a robust and comprehensive solution for endpoint protection. So far, no major negative features have been observed. However, email security integration with Microsoft 365 has room for improvement. In a recent real-world incident, a company received 10 phishing emails, of which only three were blocked by the system. Enhancing detection accuracy to block 7 or more would significantly improve trust and effectiveness. With the on-premises version, there's a known issue where assigning a device to a new group results in it being auto-assigned back to the previous group. Fixing this bug would greatly streamline device management. Additionally, in the cloud version, once a device is assigned to a user, it cannot be reassigned without deleting the user or the device entirely. It would be far more user-friendly if the platform allowed simple reassignment or de-assignment, returning the device to an "unassigned" state. As for automated behavioral analysis, while current functionality is based on machine learning, upgrading to true AI-powered detection could bring substantial improvements. Ideally, the system should proactively flag potential threats, and offer administrators the option to either allow or block applications based on intelligent risk analysis

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cortex Xnor's playbooks predefine the workflow of the automation, such as response processes, alert triggering, and enriching the context, collecting relevant indicators such as hashes, IP addresses, or domains efficiently and can detect and block malicious attacks with firewalls."
"Threat identification and detection are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable for us is the correlation feature."
"The solution is a new generation XDR that has a lot of artificial intelligence modules."
"The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind."
"If any application performs suspicious activities, such as changing registries or modifying other applications, Cortex XDR detects and blocks the entire application."
"The level of security I get for my endpoints and servers is extremely valuable."
"After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"Rules are the most valuable feature of ESET Inspect. They are created through XML language, and they track and filter events from endpoints. If the event matches the rule, the rule is triggered. Exceptions are the second most valuable feature because it gives you the power to filter false positives in large numbers. The third most valuable feature is the Learning mode that facilitates making exceptions for known processes with a good reputation."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"We had the cloud suite of KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud, and its monitoring was fine."
"Kaspersky has a Cloud Discovery feature. There is no template in Kaspersky. They provide a temporary risk assessment of the cloud services. For example, if we want to block public storage services like OneDrive or Google Drive, we need to specify each individually. The main difference is that Kaspersky's process takes more time because it requires individual input."
"All features in Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud are perfect, and I am interested in working with Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a very good solution for endpoint protection."
"The most valuable component of the solution is the malware detection feature."
"I find the EDR service valuable as it adds extra protection and provides a centralized view."
"The platform's ability to update the database from my device and manage user profiles is quite effective."
"In terms of software performance, it has been effective in providing good security."
 

Cons

"Based on our experience so far, its implementation is quite complex."
"It'll help if customization was easier."
"There are some limitations on the Traps agents."
"I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included."
"I would like to see them include NDR (Network Detection Response). Then it would work well with SIEM Response."
"I would like to see some additional features related to email protection included."
"Technology evolves every day, so it would be nice if it gets more secure. It can also have more integration with other platforms."
"There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results."
"The platform's price could be better."
"The solution could improve the consumption of resources. The RAM and CPU usage increases during usage which can cause issues. We have three separate services and it would be beneficial if all were executed from one agent limiting the over usage of system resources."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"It may be difficult for a first-time customer to understand all of the functions that are available to him."
"One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security."
"The product is complex to configure, and there are too many errors that are not errors, making it an area that can be considered for improvement."
"Every vendor is working on making the job of SOC analysts easier, with fewer false positives and more precise detections. ESET uses LiveGrid technology that provides feedback on the reputation of files and operations. It's hard to eliminate all of the false positives, but hopefully, we'll see some improvement with the advances in AI."
"It is not a stable product. We were disappointed in the stability of this product in comparison to McAffee."
"The tool's update management can be better. In future releases, the addition of a DLP module would be valuable."
"Sometimes, the tool consumes a lot of resources from the endpoints, making it an area of concern where improvements are required since it currently consumes a little bit of RAM."
"Kaspersky's cloud solution should be improved because the on-premises features are unavailable in the cloud."
"Its high CPU usage also slows down devices, particularly those with lower specifications like Core i3."
"Recently, there was a company which was attacked by phishing emails, and out of 10, it was only blocking three emails."
"It requires specific expertise or certified professionals to deploy the product. There is a need to expand the offerings to various industries covering different-sized businesses."
"Kaspersky doesn't provide local support."
"Certain shortcomings in the anti-ransomware part of the solution need improvement. XDR and MDR, along with threat hunting, a big step in cybersecurity today, need improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is $55 to $90 USD per endpoint per month."
"Our license will require renewal in August, after which the maintenance will continue as usual."
"Very costly product."
"We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice."
"Its pricing is kind of in line with its competitors and everybody else out there."
"This is an expensive solution."
"When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward."
"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."
"This is true in the case of licensing, we do not have the most expensive products, and we don't have the cheapest product, it's somewhere in the middle. Perhaps a little higher from the middle, but we are known for what we provide to our customers, and they are pleased."
"The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"The pricing and licensing are the big issue now, in my opinion. If the price was less than other companies, or a one-time charge for service was available, I think there would be more users of this solution."
"The product’s price is flexible."
"The solution is moderately priced and cannot be considered an expensive or cheap tool."
"The platform is expensive."
"I find Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud more accessible in terms of pricing."
"The pricing is favorable, and there are no additional expenses associated with using the product."
"We had to pay an annual licensing fee for KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud."
"Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud is a cost-effective solution."
"The product is averagely priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business47
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
 

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 ESET Inspect?
The platform's licensing is affordable and straightforward. We purchase soft keys, install them, and manage the licen...
What needs improvement with ESET Inspect?
One area that needs improvement for the product is ransomware protection, which does not offer complete security.
What is your primary use case for ESET Inspect?
My organization uses ESET Inspect for antivirus and internet security on laptops and desktops. On the enterprise side...
What is your primary use case for KasperskyEndpoint Security Cloud?
I already have Kaspersky Endpoint Security Cloud Optimum on my company, karinoware.com. I am working on Kaspersky End...
 

Also Known As

Cyvera, Cortex XDR, Palo Alto Networks Traps
ESET Enterprise Inspector
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Mitsubishi Motors, Allianz Suisse, Cannon, T-Mobile
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Kaspersky Next EDR Foundations and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.