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

ESET Inspect vs Logpoint comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 9, 2024

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)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (4th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (3rd), Ransomware Protection (2nd), AI-Powered Cybersecurity Platforms (1st)
ESET Inspect
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
49th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Logpoint
Ranking in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
39th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (33rd), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (29th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (14th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) category, the mindshare of Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks is 3.8%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ESET Inspect is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Logpoint is 1.0%, up from 0.3% 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 Networks3.8%
Logpoint1.0%
ESET Inspect1.0%
Other94.2%
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.
Cees Van Den Haak - PeerSpot reviewer
ICT Manager at Bouwbedrijf de Vries en Verburg BV
A product with an easy setup phase that helps manage attacks and vulnerabilities
The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that you can manage and react to vulnerabilities and attacks on all the workstations or laptops. You can put certain workstations and isolation. With ESET PROTECT, you see only one machine that is protected, but with ESET Inspect, you see all the machines that are protected in an environment.
Rifat Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at Corporate Projukti Limited
Has lacked proper integration and consistent support communication
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried to contact Exabeam by mail repeatedly, but there has been no response. My company, Corporate Projukti Limited, including my Bangladesh area head, technical director, and team manager, have sent emails to contact Exabeam solution, but there is no response. There is already a distributor in Bangladesh. The weakness with Logpoint is UEBA. UEBA is recommended, but not extra. Exabeam's UEBA is an extra feature. SOAR is extra, but Logpoint's product measurement is 40 or 50. There is a 10% difference with the UEBA and SOAR, so Logpoint is weak there. I would appreciate extra features in Logpoint such as SOAR. SOAR and UEBA are included features in Logpoint. Logpoint's UEBA is a weak point, while Exabeam's UEBA has extra AI through automation. Exabeam has a license included, and the extra license is an add-on. In Logpoint, it is included, which makes it a weak point.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The integrations are out-of-the-box, as are the playbooks."
"Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about."
"Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks has accelerated the response time for my security team, so we have been able to resolve issues faster than usual."
"Its interface and pricing are most valuable, and it is better than other vendors in terms of security."
"The protection offered by this product is good, as is the endpoint reporting."
"The solution allows us to make investigations. Other XDR solutions also provide similar capabilities but for investigation, Cortex XDR is better."
"Palo Alto is constantly adding new features."
"Since they've done their most recent update, the ease to isolate endpoints is valuable. If we find one where there is a virus on it, we can easily isolate it. We don't even have to contact the user. We don't have to manually take them off the network. We can easily isolate them."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's greatest asset lies in its user-friendly interface, which allows for easy navigation and thorough analysis of incidents."
"Scalability-wise, it is a very good solution."
"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."
"I find the multilayered endpoint security the most valuable feature."
"This solution is easy to install, setup and monitor."
"The rules are the best and most useful features."
"ESET Enterprise Inspector's most valuable feature is EDR."
"The product's most valuable features are its performance and stability."
"The main advantage of Logpoint is the support service. They reply within ten minutes to an hour to our queries."
"I use the product for my research and development to enhance my work."
"The most valuable feature, which is endpoint security, is included in Logpoint, and an extra feature is the integration."
"They basically charge you in a better way."
"The search feature is valuable. The dashboards are also valuable for our bosses. Another valuable feature, which is the main feature of the product, is the centralization of all the logs."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"The technical support for Logpoint is very good, and I would rate it as nine out of ten."
"The solution offers excellent reporting features, and our customers have been satisfied that they have been able to meet their compliance needs by giving them a standard report."
 

Cons

"The technical support is not very good. I find the process difficult."
"Impact on system performance is horrible, adding a lot of delays for users."
"I am facing issues with customer support for Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, so I am not satisfied with customer support."
"It is an enterprise-level solution. Its price could be less expensive."
"There is also no recovery feature; if some endpoint is under attack there must be the possibility of recovering it or restoring it to a normal state."
"Cortex XDR could improve its sales support team, including better commission structures and referral programs."
"There's room for improvement with Mac device installations, which can be challenging."
"A little bit more automation would be nice."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The platform's price could be better."
"We were missing visuals and graphics. Recently, a new version seems to have come out, and it has a new graphical user interface. When I was integrating it, it was usable, but the GUI needed improvement."
"One of the things we faced last year was that we had some memory issues with the server running. We were running them as virtual services, and we were facing some performance issues. Back then, there were some things that had already been solved at the end, but one of the small issues we had was that it was quite memory-consuming. After one upgrade that we did, we faced some performance issues."
"The thing that makes it a little bit challenging is when you run into a situation where you have logs that are not easily parsable."
"I would rate the stability of Logpoint as a six out of ten. I have received reports indicating glitches and downtimes with Logpoint."
"Dashboards could be developed further."
"Logpoint is not flexible. Its documentation is not user-friendly."
"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution has one subscription for endpoint protection and one subscription for detection and response. The two licenses combined give you the BRO version."
"The pricing is okay, although direct support can be expensive."
"Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance."
"The solution is expensive. It's pricing is on a yearly-basis."
"The pricing seems fair, and I do like the licensing model. You use wherever they are, and it is elastic."
"This is an expensive solution."
"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."
"It's about $55 per license on a yearly basis."
"The platform is expensive; it could be cheaper."
"I feel it is a very expensive product."
"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."
"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."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"It's getting more expensive, which is one of the reasons we're looking around just to see if there's anything better value."
"My company used to pay for LogPoint costs annually. It's a cost-effective solution. I'm not part of the Finance team, though, so I'm not sure exactly what the licensing fee is or what license my company had."
"LogPoint seemed like it was a good product, but it was expensive and there wasn't any room to move the pricing when customers needed a lower-costing solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I would rate LogPoint's pricing a seven. It is not very expensive compared to some of the more costly products, and it is not very cheap compared to some of the cheaper products in the SIEM market."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise57
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

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 LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried ...
What is your primary use case for LogPoint?
I had experience with Logpoint before, and I contacted the Exabeam solution, but there was no response; they did not ...
 

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
AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Find out what your peers are saying about ESET Inspect vs. Logpoint and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.